Street-Scape - The Good, The Bad and The Hilarious

[johnnypd]

Originally Posted by SE9

Woolwich has been on an upward trajectory for a while now. Greenwich Council spent a lot of money to turn the centre of Woolwich, to make it an attractive enough area for outsiders to consider living in.

Securing a Crossrail station was the biggest coup of all.

Flats in that Royal Arsenal development are really cheap in London terms and also gorgeous and right near the river. I can see them having a meteoric rise in value in the coming years especially with the new crossrail being built within the development itself.

[SE9]

Good point. It's a development that's been sparsely covered on this forum, and one that hasn't caught the attention of many... yet.

Eventually, residential development will be extended all the way up to Woolwich ferry (land currently occupied by a skate park, car park and Waterfront Leisure Centre). The Greenwich Council masterplan for Woolwich, put on public consultation earlier this year, explicitly stated that this was the vision.

They've done a good job with the street-scaping at Royal Arsenal:

[SF-02]

Let's not give Greenwich Council much credit for the improvements in Woolwich town centre. It was funded by the Mayor of London under the 100 public squares project, and the design competition overseen by Design for London. It does look much much better now. Greenwich Council are still mostly hopeless though. They are at the forefront of street clutter loving authorities and love festooning streets with guardrails. They still add them all over when other authorities and TfL have realised they are ugly, dangerous, and pricey.

Also, the other part of the square (Beresford Square) is used as a car park by many after late afternoon, despite it not being so. It's not a great idea to have many cars and vans driving over new expensive stone paving. Yeah, it's a market so can get a bit scruffy but lots of cars driving over it does not help. Nothing is done about that and Greenwich's record is poor on the public realm so not a surprise really. I hope the council actually does maintain the areas, clean them, and doesn't allow the creep of a sign here, a barrier here to happen as normally does.

Also, the driving standards around Woolwich are bloody dire. The worst I have ever experienced in the UK. So much stupidity and dangerous driving seen so it's no surprise cars are driven and parked on new squares.

[DarJoLe]

Well done Boris!

[SE9]

Originally Posted by SF-02

Let's not give Greenwich Council much credit for the improvements in Woolwich town centre. It was funded by the Mayor of London under the 100 public squares project, and the design competition overseen by Design for London. It does look much much better now. Greenwich Council are still mostly hopeless though. They are at the forefront of street clutter loving authorities and love festooning streets with guardrails. They still add them all over when other authorities and TfL have realised they are ugly, dangerous, and pricey.

Also, the other part of the square (Beresford Square) is used as a car park by many after late afternoon, despite it not being so. It's not a great idea to have many cars and vans driving over new expensive stone paving. Yeah, it's a market so can get a bit scruffy but lots of cars driving over it does not help. Nothing is done about that and Greenwich's record is poor on the public realm so not a surprise really. I hope the council actually does maintain the areas, clean them, and doesn't allow the creep of a sign here, a barrier here to happen as normally does.

Also, the driving standards around Woolwich are bloody dire. The worst I have ever experienced in the UK. So much stupidity and dangerous driving seen so it's no surprise cars are driven and parked on new squares.

The Woolwich Squares project (redevelopment of General Gordon Square and Beresford Square) cost £6.6 million. The project was approved by Greenwich councillors in 2009. Greenwich Council secured funding from:

1. The Department for Communities and Local Government.
2. Transport for London.
3. Local developers.

- The design competition was run by Greenwich Council and its partners: Woolwich Regeneration Agency, Design for London & Transport for London (-)
- The scheme was approved after detailed local consultation undertaken by Greenwich Council (-)

Greenwich Council were not bystanders.

[ill tonkso]

Originally Posted by DarJoLe

Well done Boris!

This is his fault how? You are like a broken record.

[DarJoLe]

Originally Posted by ill tonkso

This is his fault how? You are like a broken record.

What? I'm just congratulating the Mayor on delivering a great project for Woolwich. When's the next one of these happening?

[delores]

This sort of work should be commended its successfully turned a miserable part of London into a desirable place through quality landscaping street furniture and understanding of the needs of the community, now apply this to every town and you will do wonders to the uk. The government should look at this sort of regeneration as impetus to the economy and it's well being.

[ill tonkso]

Originally Posted by DarJoLe

What? I'm just congratulating the Mayor on delivering a great project for Woolwich. When's the next one of these happening?

Sorry. I thought you were blaming him for something else posted.

Still, nothing to do with him anyway.

I have to say though, it is looking fantastic! Also, proper townhouses! Brick with Stone cornicing! Decent sized family homes at a suitable density for an urban area. Fantastic,

[cnapan]

I don't know if it's coincidence, but on my cycle home tonight I noticed that they've removed the railings by the pedestrian crossing in Putney High Street. (I noticed because I normally grab them when waiting for the lights!)

I wonder if someone from Putney council has been reading this forum!

(If you have, can I just point out that some big potholes are looming again on the bridge :-) )

[NCT]

Accidents up where guardrail cut

Road accidents and casualties have increased at locations where Transport for London has removed guardrailing.

Since 2009 TfL has removed 63.4km of guardrail from the Transport for London Road Network, 31% of the total. It has monitored accidents at the 808 separate locations.

In a letter to guardrail designer Doug Stewart, TfL presents data comparing like-for-like time periods, ranging from ten to 22 months. “At the 808 sites monitored there were 1,913 collisions in the ‘before’ periods compared with 2,015 in the ‘after’ periods,” it says. This represents a 5% rise.

“These collisions resulted in 2,330 casualties ‘before’ compared to 2,495 ‘after’,” it adds. This represents a 7% rise.

It says the trends are “generally in line with wider changes across London”. Total collisions resulting in casualties increased 1% from 2009/10-2010/11.

TfL told LTT this week that slight pedestrian casualties in London rose 8% in 2010. “The Mayor has asked us to look into the increase as a matter of urgency,” said a spokesman. “It is not in line with the long-term trend so we need to identify the root causes.”

https://www.transportxtra.com/magazi...news/?ID=27567

[ill tonkso]

5% rise is worth it. Darwinism at its best.

[spindrift]

Christ.

[flare]

Statistically insignificant increase and with any road scheme change you tend to get a small increase in collisions/accidents. Longer term trend will be interesting.

[potto]

root cause? Well vehicles are still travelling too fast to avoid hitting and injuring people!

[Peckhamdamo]

Maybe that's why they have reinstalled them on the central reservation at Elephant & Castle?

[steppenwolf]

I'm generally in favour of reducing street clutter, but in a few locations removing guardrails have reduced quality. For instance, there used to be a small island garden in Archway with railings around its benches and planting. A pedestrian crossing and path ran through it. Guardrails were removed and now it's just a traffic island surrounded by busy roads.

There is a fashion for removing railings to such an extent that no consultation or work is being done beforehand. This even extends to historic railings (not around parks). I've heard the argument 'we're getting rid of railing everywhere so these [old ones] shouold probably go too'.

[Bezben]

You also have to look at it psychologically, I don't know about you but if I walk on a pavement along the road and there's no guardrailing then I tend to walk as far from the road as possible. The chances of a car coming off and hitting me are 1/1000000 but I guess it's just habit? And I guess if you have guardrails maybe people are more likely to wakl along the edge of the road because it "feels safer"? Does anyone else follow me?

[Rational Plan]

Certain complain about guardrail penning in pedestrians and channeling them like sheep. But if you see some of the chances people take in crossing roads at busy junctions, you can see why they were put in the first place.

[potto]

certain people? They are universally panned as unwelcome intrusions into community space as is anything that is picked up as ugly in an environment people have to spend time in.

We are talking about urban centres of various sizes here not out-of-town junctions where an unsuspecting pedestrian may wander unknowingly onto a grassy banked dual carriage way.

Vehicles should be driven appropriately for the environment that they are in not the other way around. The person out on the street or in a building is the base currency of an urban community not an isolated person whizzing through in a metal box. All this just proves is that people can not handle vehicles appropriately.

The way traffic accelerates hard away from the lights at Kings Cross up toward the one way system of Pentonville Road as if starting an F1 race, desperate to beat a couple of junction lights toward the inevitable slow down within 2 minutes at Angel is a perfect case in point.

Semi-Automation will be the next step.