LCC in Hackney - Evidence to Dalston South Public Enquiry

Evidence from the LCC in Hackney to the Dalston South public enquiry

Contents:

: Principles; Summary; 1. The Authors; 2. The LCC; 3. The LCC in Hackney; 4. LCC, LBH and vitality in Dalston; 5. Consequences of motor dependence - Local effects; 6. Consequences of motor dependence - National effects; 7. Consequences of motor dependence - Global effects; 8. The Evolving Planning Context; 9. Planners v. citizens - the lessons of Holly Street; 10. Former disadvantages - future opportunities; 11. Assessing the value of Roseberry Place; 12. Motor-traffic in Roseberry Place; 13. Negative effects of the proposed closure of Roseberry Place; 14. Opportunity cost of closing Roseberry Place; 15. The Kingsland Waste; 16. Public-Transport opportunity cost; 17. A cycle-track replacement for Roseberry Place?; 18. Preserving the permeability of the townscape; 19. Economy v. Environment?; Appendix I; Appendix II; Appendix III

That any activity is assumed to be environmentally damaging unless proved otherwise.

"That environmental problems should be prevented rather than cured."
Action for the Environment: Policy Declaration, London Borough of Hackney, May 1994

"Economic activity is not an aim in itself but a method of benefiting people"
Hackney Tomorrow: shaping a better future, Hackney Agenda 21/London Borough of Hackney, December 1996

"The public mood is for change. We cannot carry on as at present. People agree that something needs to be done about traffic congestion and the problems it causes."
Developing an Integrated Transport Policy, Department of the Environment Transport and the Regions 1997

Summary

Motor-traffic congestion presents a massive threat to public health, prosperity and social cohesion in Hackney. The growing recognition that escalating motor-dependence is neither desirable or sustainable signals a retreat from mass motorisation.

Hackney has low car ownership and a dense integrated land-use pattern. These give Hackney a head start in the process of evolving new patterns of organisation and land-use that reverse the trend to ever increasing motor-dependence. Development that seeks to incite or encourage motor-dependence undermines these advantages and is highly undesirable. The request to extinguish or modify the public right of way along Roseberry Place comes as part of a proposal to remodel a large area of surrounding land. Any genuine analysis of the costs and benefits of the proposed road closure demands an evaluation of the present and potential value of the thoroughfare and the costs and benefits of the proposed development that demands its closure.

The proposed development is controversial and highly subsidised; it offers few benefits, threatens to bring serious problems and has a high opportunity cost.

The developers have proposed a cycle-track to replace Roseberry Place in the event of consent being given for the closure. Roseberry Place must remain a right of way for cycle-traffic and pedestrian-traffic. A permissive right of way is not acceptable.

The ability of cycle and pedestrian-traffic to get from place to place without extensive diversions is recognised as a key issue for travellers using the benign modes of walking and cycling.

The local environment - clean air, pleasant environs and a distinctive sense of place - is a critical factor in regeneration. Sustained prosperity cannot be achieved at the expense of local quality of life.

The Authors

1.1
My name is Douglas Carnall. I live at 7 Navarino Grove in the London Borough of Hackney. I am at present co-ordinator of the London Cycling Campaign in Hackney. I am a local general medical practitioner working at Queensbridge Road Surgery in Hackney. I am also an associate editor of the British Medical Journal, and have contributed articles on transport policy and health there as well as reviewing articles submitted for publication. I graduated MB ChB from Sheffield in 1989 and attained Membership of the Royal College of General Practitioners in 1994.

1.2
My name is Patrick Field. I live at 147 Amhurst Road, in the London Borough of Hackney. I have lived at this address since 1981. I am a founder member of the London Cycling Campaign and the author of two guide-books to London and its environs. I write for various publications on issues of land-use and transportation, have a BSc honours degree in Psychology from the University of London (Bedford College, 1977) and have worked with the London Cycling Campaign and other voluntary groups that deal with issues of transport, land-use, access and public-health since 1978. I have recently become a Trustee of Hackney Local Agenda 21 Action Trust.

The LCC

2.1
The London Cycling Campaign is a Capital-wide organisation that has 568 members in the London Borough of Hackney, and 8,000 in London Between 8,000 and 10,000 of Hackney's citizens regularly travel by cycle. Hackney has one of the highest rates of cycle-use in Greater London.

The LCC in Hackney

3.1
In Hackney the LCC attends quarterly Cycle Liaison meetings hosted by the LBH Highways Department. Since September 1992 these meetings have been expanded to include representatives from the Metropolitan Police, LBH Sports Development and Health Promotion. The LCC suggested this expansion to allow a more integrated approach to the concerns of cycle-traffic, and the cause of increasing cycle-use in Hackney.

3.2
In July 1992 Hackney LCC suggested the LBH should set targets for the increase in cycle-traffic. The LBH declined to do so. The practice of Local Authorities setting targets for cycle use was endorsed by the DoT in June 1994.

3.3
In collaboration with East London and City Health Promotion the Hackney LCC organises a successful annual event to promote cycle travel in North East London.

3.4
Hackney LCC runs a self-help maintenance workshop for cyclists in Hackney.

3.5
The LCC's aim is to promote cycling as an efficient, non-polluting, health-enhancing mode of transport. Its head office employs six full time staff who work closely with the Cycling Touring Club which represents cyclists nationally, a collaboration which resulted in the publication of the National Cycle Strategy in 1996. At local level, Hackney LCC has published its own manifesto (appended) which outlines the principles of its work with local government. This document was presented to the LBH in December 1995.

3.6
Hackney LCC has collaborated closely with the local Agenda 21 process and other local groups to find solutions to the transport, planning and environmental problems faced in the Borough.

LCC, LBH and vitality in Dalston

4.1
In November 1994 the LCC addressed - as an objector - a Public Inquiry into the London Borough of Hackney's proposed change of land-use in the East of the Borough. LBH wished to change a site from industrial to retail use to allow the construction of an 'out of centre' hypermarket to be operated by J. Sainsbury plc.

4.2
The inspector rejected this proposal. Following this decision Sainsbury closed their supermarket in Kingsland High Street and opened a new and larger store in the Kingsland shopping centre, boosting commercial activity in the Dalston area.

Consequences of Motor-dependence

Local effects

5.1
More than 90% of air pollution in London comes from motor vehicle exhausts.

5.2
Air quality in Hackney and in London regularly exceeds the recommended maximum limits for pollutants. The EC guide level for NO2 (nitrogen dioxide) is 28 ppb The EC action level (above which roads are closed in many European cities) is 40 ppb. The average concentrations of NO2 at background sites (i.e. not near a road) in Hackney is around 20 ppb close to busy roads the average is between 40 and 50 ppb.

5.3
There are no safe limits for particulate air pollution. Research published in the BMJ has shown that one in fifty deaths from cardiovascular disease are directly attributable to high levels of air pollution. Other research has shown an increase in respiratory complaints including upper airways irritation, asthma and bronchitis in conditions of high air pollution levels. Although deaths from air pollution are mainly observed in groups of patients with already existing heart or lung disease, the fact that an effect is measurable in this group suggests that harm is occurring to everyone. The considerable cardio-respiratory reserve capacity that healthy adults have protects them from short term injury or death, but is likely to be undermined if exposure rises or is prolonged.

5.4
Noise pollution from increasing levels of motor traffic is an increasingly recognised as a threat to health. Reduced quality of sleep of those living near busy roads has been shown to increase their rates of anxiety and depression, and decreases the ability of school children to concentrate.

5.5
The risk of death and injury from motor traffic incidents are well-recognised. Attendant to this risk , though less obvious, is the fear that it engenders. Twenty years ago, only 1 in 10 children was escorted to school; now the figure is 8 in 10. The prime reason that parents give for their actions is fear of motor traffic, ironically engendering greater car use and a downward spiral of congestion and danger.

5.6
Greater motor traffic makes it physically difficult to cross roads, and less pleasant to remain on the pavement. This effect - known as community severance - reduces human interaction in the city and increases social isolation.

5.7
Motor-dependence in Hackney is associated with violent crime. In May 1993 a young man was murdered in a dispute over road space between motorists. LBH parking attendants (traffic wardens) began operating in September 1994. In the first six weeks of their duties, sixteen needed hospital treatment for injuries inflicted by motorists.

5.8
Motor-dependence is the largest threat to social-cohesion that Hackney faces.

Consequences of Motor-dependence

National effects

6.1
The economic burden of increasing car dependence is substantial. Detailed cost-benefit analyses that attempt to cost the economic externalities of increasing car use estimate that the cost to the UK economy of motor traffic use is between Ł45bn and Ł60bn each year. Tax and excise duties on fuel and vehicles raise Ł20bn.

6.2
The increasing use of the car for activities formerly undertaken on foot, by bicycle or public transport has led to a shift in land use to out of town sites. Up to 25% of those without a car no longer have ready access to shops that sell fresh fruit and vegetables, yet the importance of a diet rich in fresh produce for health is not in doubt. Malnutrition is not just something that happens in the developing world.

6.3
The increasingly sedentary nature of life in a car-dependent culture is recognised as a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease and obesity. The British Family Heart Survey found that more than 71% of British adults exercised less than once a month, despite its beneficial effects on health.

6.4
Walking and cycling are both excellent forms of aerobic exercise and convenient modes of local transport. The smooth, non-jarring action of pedalling makes it a particularly suitable activity for the obese, the arthritic and the elderly, and for rehabilitation after injury or illness. Prescribing exercise should be a vital part in the therapeutic armamentarium of every general practitioner, and exercise that can be built into daily routines is much more likely to be sustained. The best way to make walking and cycling more attractive is to reduce motor traffic levels.

Consequences of Motor-dependence

Global effects

7.1
If the global trends of consumption of fossil fuels continues and atmospheric CO2 levels double in the next fifty years, there is now a strong scientific consensus that global temperatures will rise by 1 to 3 degrees Celsius. The precise level and nature of the effect are unknown, but it is plausible that burning a substantial proportion of the bio-mass laid down over the 100 million years or so of the carboniferous era in somewhat less than 200 years may have large effects. The warmer weather predicted in the south east of England may be welcome (though the return of malaria and other subtropical diseases will not).

7.2
Twenty per cent of CO2 emissions globally arise from transport. All governments have a duty to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases, particularly those in developed countries such as Britain.

The Evolving Planning Context

8.1
The last ten years have seen a rapid change in the policy context for transport and land-use in the UK; from the certainties that informed the ill-fated 1989 'Roads to Prosperity' programme to the present era where policy is being reviewed like never before.

8.2
In 1994 HM Secretary of State for Transport responded to the publication of the report of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution by calling for a 'wide-ranging debate' on issues of transportation, land-use and planning.

8.3
In 1994 the Department of Transport changed its policy position on cycle-travel. It recognised for the first time the existence of suppressed demand for cycle-travel. It encouraged Local Authorities to 'develop plans which concentrate development generating high numbers of trips in locations which are accessible by all means of travel, especially those which are better for the environment.'

8.4
The first National Cycling Strategy was launched by the DTp in 1998.

8.5
In 1996 a group was formed by the DTp to develop a strategy for walking.

8.6
In 1997 the Road Traffic Reduction Act requires local authorities to draw up and implement local plans to reduce the level of motor-traffic on our roads. A further Act is expected this year demanding the selection of targets for motor-traffic reduction

8.7
Following the 1997 General Election the new Government is currently reviewing the roads programme and developing an integrated transport policy to be published as a White Paper in the Spring of 1998.

8.8
During the last week of 1997 the Government confirmed that it is considering including taxes on land-used for motor-vehicle parking in its Spring White Paper.

8.9
These continuing rapid changes in the policy context for transport and land-use in general, and motor-traffic in particular, have complicated the task of those who wish to design and construct - or are obliged to assess - developments that involve the possibility of generating and catering for new motor-traffic. Successful developments must anticipate future conditions not reflect those that exist today.

Planners v. citizens - the lessons of Holly Street

9.1
Twenty years ago Hackney Council planned to demolish 19th Century housing in the Mapledene area East of Queensbridge Road to build high-rise flats to match the Holly Street Estate on the West side of Queensbridge Road. Local people, tenants and residents, fought a long, bitter and successful campaign to resist this .

9.2
Today the once doomed houses of Mapledene change hands for six figure sums and Hackney Council and the Dalston City Partnership are claiming plaudits for partially demolishing and radically remodelling the Holly Street estate.

9.3
The fence surrounding the site of the Holly Street works carries the slogan:- "down with the old up with the new". In the hubris that surrounds the rehabilitation of the estate a chastening recognition of this giant municipal mistake seems to have been lost. Perhaps a better description of the wholly commendable enterprise of replacing and repairing the estate is:- "down with the nearly new up with the newer".

9.4
The legacy of Holly Street places the onus firmly on the planners to prove that any large scale development - especially one demanding changes to the original street pattern - will not have a detrimental effect on Hackney's environment, public-health or future prosperity.

9.5
The rehabilitation of the Holly Street estate is the principle positive accomplishment of Dalston City Partnership. If DCP manages, in the teeth of unanimous public hostility, to instigate a planning disaster of its own for future correction this achievement will be cancelled out.

Former disadvantages - future opportunities

10.1
Much of Hackney retains a dense street plan with tight integration of residential, industrial and commercial facilities. This land-use pattern evolved before the spread of motor-dependence.

10.2
By present day UK standards car ownership in Hackney is low. Many of Hackney's citizens cannot afford to own a car. Many others choose not to own a car because they do not want to degrade their environment and do not want to become involved in the stress and conflict that the use of private cars in cities inevitably involves.

10.3
There is a broad consensus that ever-increasing car ownership and use cannot be accommodated. New social and geographical structures will develop that take account of this.

10.4
Existing patterns of land-use and car ownership give Hackney, where 70% of all shopping trips are made entirely by foot, a head-start in this process. As the priorities of social organisation change former disadvantages become future opportunities.

10.5
There is no scope for acceptable increases in car ownership in Hackney. Any measures which encourage car-dependence in Hackney should be rejected.

10.6
Holly Street estate was one of Britain's last municipal, residential, system-built, high-rise developments. The high-rise estate was the planning mistake of the 1960's. Car-dependant shopping and leisure developments were the planning mistake of the 1990's. The people of Hackney do not want to suffer from the last spasm of another misguided, socially-disruptive trend.

Assessing the value of Roseberry Place

11.1
The request to extinguish or modify the public right of way along Roseberry Place comes as part of a proposal to remodel a large area of surrounding land. Any genuine analysis of the costs and benefits of this proposed road closure demands an evaluation of the present and potential value of the thoroughfare and the costs and benefits of the proposed construction and landscaping that demands the closure.

11.2
The controversial and heavily subsidised proposals for the Dalston Southsite have evolved with no opportunity for public participation. This makes a careful consideration of the context in which the closure of Roseberry Place is proposed particularly urgent.

Motor-traffic in Roseberry Place

12.1
The proposed developers have suggested that Roseberry place is used as a rat-run by through-traffic . Our data suggests that more than half the motor-traffic in the morning peak uses Roseberry place for access (see Appendix II). Some of this access traffic uses the off-street parking.

There is also considerable temporary on-street parking by mini-cabs operating from the office in Dalston Lane just West of the old Dalston Junction Station site. Pedestrian and cycle flows on the street are light.

12.2
The off-street car-parks presently located on the proposed development site have an estimated capacity of 65. They are used on weekdays only with a midweek average of around 50 % occupancy (see Appendix II).

Negative effects of the proposed closure of Roseberry Place

13.1
It seems safe to conclude that replacing the lightly used car-parks that presently exist on the site with a much larger area for car-storage, intended to attract vehicles seven days a week, will generate much more motor-traffic than the current use.

13.2
If Roseberry Place is closed, the developers and their supporters within LBH and DCP anticipate that the council offices on Roseberry Place, and presumably the motor-traffic they generate, will be displaced to other sites in the Borough. (The costs of this relocation representing a further public-subsidy to the proposed development.) We are aware of no plans for the mini-cab amenity which provides a service to the majority of local residents who do not have permanent access to private motor-transport.

13.3
The current low flow of motor-traffic using Roseberry Place to get from Forest Road to Dalston Lane probably reflects the difficulty of getting motor-vehicles from Roseberry Place into Dalston Lane and from Forest Road into Kingsland Road or Queensbridge Road.

13.4
Increased vehicle conflict at the entrance to the proposed car-park would certainly delay the large number of bus services that run along the important East-West corridor of Dalston Lane. It is widely recognised that:- "Buses are the most important motorised means of travel within the Borough."

13.5
The entrance to the car Park behind the Kingsland Centre at the junction of Martel Place and Dalston Lane already threatens gridlock every Saturday. At the junction of Roseberry Place Dalston Lane also carries the East-West traffic coming on and off Graham Road. The potential for chaos at the Junction of Dalston Lane and a truncated Roseberry Place is considerable.

13.6
During the full council meeting on outline planning permission Cllr. P. Snell suggested the best place for an entrance to the proposed new car-park would be onto the Kingsland Road. During the full council meeting on detailed planning permission Cllr. J. McCafferty suggested that the entrance would be best located in Forest Road if the Bridge there were strengthened.

13.7
Both Snell and McCafferty voted for the present scheme. Recurring suggestions made by the scheme's supporters would seem to confirm that the vehicle entrance, as proposed, is likely to cause problems.

Opportunity cost of closing Roseberry Place

The Urban Initiatives study

14.1
In 1995 The consultants Urban Initiatives were appointed by Dalston City Partnership to explore opportunities to promote town centre revitalisation.

14.2
The core area of this study, which was published in August 1995, includes the retail and commercial buildings fronting the east side of Kingsland High Street between Abbott Street, Dalston Lane, the Printhouse, The Pentecostal Church and all development fronting Ashwin Street together with nos. 1-9 Dalston Lane.

14.3
The study's wider context includes the half of the site of the proposed Dalston South development which lies to the West of Roseberry Place.

14.4
The study proposes a:- "block by block approach utilising existing buildings, spaces and activities where possible, together with identifying developing sites within the existing fabric" . It further asserts that:- "Comprehensive redevelopment of substantial parts of the town centre is therefore not considered practical or viable in the short term."

14.5
The study identifies Ridley Road market as an important attraction for the Town Centre.

14.6
The study identifies the importance of the "emerging 'Creative Industries Quarter' ". Unfortunately the study area did not include the Council-owned auditorium to the East of Roseberry Place, home of a dance venue of international significance.

14.7
Under the heading of "Key Opportunities" the study states:- "The Town Centre is composed of a fine grain network of streets enclosed by a varied mix of domestic, ecclesiastical, commercial and industrial buildings. An opportunity exists to extend this street pattern to reinforce pedestrian linkages and promote street activity..."

14.8
The study proposes a new walking street. A back lane running North-South between Ridley Road and Dalston Lane behind the buildings that front onto Kingsland High Street.

The Kingsland Waste

15.1
On the Kingsland Road, South of Richmond Road there is a busy Saturday street market - Kingsland Waste. This already has a ready made back street - Glebe Road - complete with authentic Nineteenth Century cobblestones.

15.2
Although some stalls sell new goods The Waste is primarily a 'flea market' selling a range of secondhand books, appliances, and all manner of ancient and modern ephemera.

15.3
Junk markets like this - with the added resource of a vital local arts community - have a habit of evolving into thriving antique and craft markets. Camden Passage by Islington Green and Portobello Road are obvious examples. This is a much more probable route to sustainable local prosperity than the motor-dependent monolith presently proposed for the Dalston South site.

15.4
It seems logical to take our models of development from other highly successful Inner London locations rather than using an off-the-peg, suburban solution that threatens to intensify Dalston's present, toxic, motor-traffic chaos.

15.5
The loss of Roseberry Place would be the loss of the opportunity to create a continuous, human-scale, walking circuit connecting Ridley Road and The Kingsland Waste.

Public-Transport opportunity cost

16.1
Dalston Junction is an important interchange for buses. A further opportunity cost of the closure of Roseberry place as proposed would be the loss of a potential integrated interchange between buses and any rail link that is constructed on the existing rail corridor.

16.2
The proposed development does nothing to enable the construction of the East London Line. It does not offer any financial contribution to the costs of the line. The fact that the developers are willing to persist with their scheme without the ELLX offers further clues that their scheme is based on inciting and accommodating motor-dependence.

A cycle-track replacement for Roseberry Place?

17.1
The developers have proposed a cycle-track to replace Roseberry Place in the event of consent being given for the closure of Roseberry Place.

17.2
LCC wrote to the LBH Planning Dept on 11/12/97 seeking clarification of the status of this route.

See Appendix III

We have received an acknowledgement but no reply.

17.3
If this path is permissive only it is of no value as it is vulnerable to total or partial closure by an unaccountable organisation.

17.4
If this proposed track is permissive who will design of it? What safeguards will be taken to avoid conflict between cycle-traffic on the path and motor-traffic manoeuvring within or queuing to leave or enter the site? Even if the track remains a public right of way these are important issues that should be resolved before consent for any change of designation of the right of way is given.

17.5
Unless designated a public right of way this path would be an alibi-facility. An alibi facility is one which is not intended to benefit the public but designed for politicians and planners to cite as a defence against the charge of encouraging motor-supremacy.

17.6
Roseberry Place must remain a right of way for cycle-traffic and pedestrian-traffic. A permissive right of way is not acceptable.

Preserving the permeability of the townscape

18.1
The permeability of the townscape; the ability of cycle and pedestrian-traffic to get from place to place without extensive diversions is recognised as a key issue for travellers using the benign modes of walking and cycling.

18.2
The London Cycling Campaign is pleased to report that the London Borough of Hackney is making important strides towards reopening the street grid to cycle traffic. For example the Shoreditch one-way system is currently being redesigned for two-way operation for cycle-traffic.

18.3
Closing thoroughfares to cycle and pedestrian traffic, even if in theory they remain open as permissive rights of way is not acceptable and at odds with the National Cycling Strategy and the National Walking Strategy.

Economy v. Environment?

19.1
High speed travel, digital communication and globalisation mean that increasing numbers of commercial concerns are free to choose the location from which they operate.

19.2
The local environment - clean air, pleasant environs and a distinctive sense of place - is a critical factor in the choice of working location. Sustained prosperity cannot be achieved at the expense of local quality of life.

Appendix I

Hackney LCC Manifesto

Appendix II

Motor-traffic count taken on Roseberry Place

17.12.97 07:45-08:45

Count of off-street motor-vehicle storage on Roseberry Place 16-18/12/97

Appendix III

Lucille Price 161-189, CITY ROAD, LONDON EC1V 1NR 11/12/97

Re. Proposed Development on Dalston Lane and Roseberry Place Application Number South/370/96/OUT

Dear Ms. Price, I understand that the revised plans for the Dalston South scheme include a cycle-route running North-South across the site. Could you clarify the status of this route by answering the following questions.

Would the proposed route be a public right of way and if so how would it be classified?

Will the route be open to cycle traffic at all times or would the operators of the site retain the right to close it?