1 / 17

Tuesdays at APA–DC 13 th May 2014

Tuesdays at APA–DC 13 th May 2014 The Community Streets Program in Hounslow, London: A Community-Led Approach to Street Design Gareth James Community Engagement and Transport Initiatives Officer, London Borough of Hounslow gareth.james@hounslow.gov.uk. The London Borough of Hounslow.

dale-parsons
Download Presentation

Tuesdays at APA–DC 13 th May 2014

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Tuesdays at APA–DC • 13th May 2014 • The Community Streets Program in Hounslow, London: A Community-Led Approach to Street Design • Gareth JamesCommunity Engagement and Transport Initiatives Officer, London Borough of Hounslow • gareth.james@hounslow.gov.uk

  2. The London Borough of Hounslow Population: 254,000 18th largest of 32 Boroughs Image: London Councils

  3. Context • Mayor of London's transport strategy published May 2010 • Each borough must develop a Local Implementation Plan (LIP) to support delivery of the Mayor’s strategy • LIP covers 2011-31, but the Delivery Plan is updated every 3 years, detailing the funding allocation and which strategic goals each program is designed to help achieve • Community Streets funding allocation for 2011-14 was $1.35M and goals are to increase walking and cycling, reduce CO2 emissions, and improve accessibility of the transport system

  4. Community Streets Overview • Jointly run by Community Partnership Unit and Transport Planning • Residents’ applications assessed based on the case put forward and any additional information that is readily available (e.g. accident data) • Aim is to develop innovative, low-cost methods of improving the streetscape, enhancing livability, and achieving LIP goals • Community-led with extensive public engagement, to deliver better solutions, social inclusion, and community cohesion • Concept designs by Sustrans; construction-level designs and implementation by Hounslow Highways

  5. Oriel School - Background • Application by “Hounslow Road and Oriel School Community Streets Group” approved in May 2010; concerns they had outlined included: • Crossing the service road • Need for traffic calming • Speeding around the school area • Poor parking practices by parents • Meetings held to gather feedback from stakeholders • Reviewed School Travel Plan, a visual parking assessment, traffic counts, and accident data • Developed vision document and refined designs through further community meetings and officer input • Design concept approved by Area Forum in September 2011

  6. Oriel School - Before

  7. Oriel School – Design • Anti-skid coloured surfacing – blue indicates pedestrian desire lines • New seating • Bollards to discourage pavement parking • Mosaic bollard at entrance provides gateway feature

  8. Oriel School – After (Oct 2013)

  9. Oriel School – After (Oct 2013)

  10. Wigley Road - Background • Council had been looking at potential solutions to the rat running issue • Speed humps not deemed by TfL to be best solution • Community Streets project launched July 2012 • Objectives were agreed at initial residents’ meetings: • Discourage rat running • Reduce speeds • Address parking problems • Improve walking and cycling environment • Enhance green areas

  11. Wigley Road – Project Area

  12. Wigley Road – Design • Agreed an approach that could include road closures, traffic calming, and place-making • Gathered baseline speed and volume data • Developed designs through extensive engagement: • 12 “official” meetings (and several more besides) • Emails, letters, phone conversations, and blog • “Door knocking” and home visits • Trialed closure of service road access for 7 weeks in Sept. 2013 • Conducted new traffic counts to compare with baseline data • Communicated results of trial to residents by letter and on the blog • 69% support for road access closure (74% including petition)

  13. Access Closure Results

  14. “Street trial” (March 2014)

  15. “Street trial” (March 2014)

  16. Lessons Learned • Bring together urban designers and those responsible for implementation as early in the process as possible • The process naturally brings communities together, but beware of hidden tensions • The bottom-up approach may need some parameters (e.g. a long-list) to ensure investment is targeted at areas with the greatest need • For larger projects, it’s important to consider who qualifies as “local” • Look for opportunities to augment the investment in the area and sustain the project’s cohesion benefits (nearby projects involving non-profits, active travel initiatives, forming a residents’ association) • Mainstreaming the community-led approach into other transport programs requires careful planning and adequate resources

  17. Thank you

More Related