{"id":399,"date":"2024-08-07T08:15:40","date_gmt":"2024-08-07T08:15:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/freshminster.com\/?p=399"},"modified":"2024-08-07T08:15:41","modified_gmt":"2024-08-07T08:15:41","slug":"reduced-connaught-village-scheme-to-go-ahead-say-council-despite-being-three-times-less-popular-than-a-previous-plan-that-dealt-with-the-traffic","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/freshminster.com\/index.php\/2024\/08\/07\/reduced-connaught-village-scheme-to-go-ahead-say-council-despite-being-three-times-less-popular-than-a-previous-plan-that-dealt-with-the-traffic\/","title":{"rendered":"Reduced Connaught Village scheme to go ahead, say council, despite being three times less popular than a previous plan that dealt with the traffic"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n

\u201cI expect that the Connaught Green project, on its own, will have no impact on the volume of traffic running through our high street. This is the single biggest issue facing our declining, cherished high street\u201d.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cWithout any meaningful change in traffic volume, this proposal appears set to become another “Mound” debacle\u201d.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Westminster Council has released the results of the latest consultation for Connaught Village Green, and it has confirmed that the \u00a31.4m scheme will go ahead in its reduced form. But the results of the consultation prove very revealing. Less than a fifth of respondents support the current scheme, and dozens of the comments showed people\u2019s feelings about it. \u201cI have to say that I am disappointed with (the) proposal compared with the original scheme sent to us\u201d says one.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cThe point of the scheme was to create a village centre and this does nothing of the sort. It is a complete waste of money. At the very minimum Kendal St should be narrowed\u201d.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

What is Connaught Village?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Connaught Village is an area in Westminster just five minutes walk from Hyde Park, famed for its lovely shops, nice cafes, and queues around the block for Basque cheesecake. It is mainly on Connaught street. We first wrote about it here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It has a lot of potential to be a destination to visit, and a temporary parklet recently did very well here<\/a>, but there\u2019s one big problem that everyone talks about, the traffic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is two-way on both Connaught Street and Kendal Street, and notoriously busy. Local residents association HyPER have wanted a village square which would stop the traffic flowing down the whole of Connaught street and create a proper space for the local community to gather, relax and enjoy themselves. Many locals and businesses have called for the traffic to be reduced, which would make Connaught village a more pleasant place to spend time in, but also encourage footfall and help local trade, it is thought.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
Connaught street and Kendal Street<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"\"
Connaught Street at night<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"\"
Local group HyPER\u2019s proposal<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Connaught Village map<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

So what is the current, less popular, plan?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The current plan involves some planting, seating, and raised tables on the road, and a water fountain, but not a lot to deal with the traffic. Motor traffic will be kept two-way on Connaught street and Kendal street, with just a handful of parking spaces removed, as seen in the photo on the left here. (Not sure this is great use of over a million quid is it? – Ed).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

There is a thorough write-up of the current plans, with lots of photographs, in this previous article on our website<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Less than a fifth of respondents supported the current scheme<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The consultation, which was not widely publicised and did not have an online version, attracted 75 responses, showing that this is an issue local people really care about. But- only 19% of respondents, less than a fifth, supported this new watered-down scheme as is.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cMany reasonable individuals may be opposed on the grounds that this is too little value for the money — they would not be wrong\u201d.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cI\u2019m disappointed to see this scheme get scaled back at every iteration\u201d.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Over half of respondents opposed the current scheme, and over 60% of those because they thought it wasn\u2019t ambitious enough<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Out of those who did the consultation, over half, 56%, opposed the current scheme as-is. And interestingly, over half of those who opposed the design (62%) opposed it because they wanted to see a more ambitious scheme which included traffic reduction. In other words, way over half of those who opposed the current plans did so because they wanted it to be more ambitious.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cIt delivers almost nothing of substance to the businesses and the people who rely on Connaught Street to live and work and does not support the local businesses in generating a positive environment\u201d.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

There is one big problem with the watered-down scheme, say residents, and that is that it doesn\u2019t deal with the traffic<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Both Kendal street and Connaught street currently have two-way traffic, and with the current proposals, that will not change. There was comment after comment from local people saying they were unhappy about this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cThe proposal \u2026 does nothing to reduce the Rat Run of vehicles that use Connaught Village to drive at speeds all hours of the day. This is not a neighbourhood due to this road; it is simply a traffic highway\u201d.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Residents hoped for something more like Westminster\u2019s St John\u2019s Wood High Street<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

A number of residents commented in the consultation that they were hoping that this scheme would be more like the design of St John\u2019s Wood High Street, which has been roundly praised by those who visit. A one-way system has been implemented, with wide pavements and more seating. One says: \u201cThe new one-way system in St Johns Wood High Street has worked to improve the area, both for pedestrians and business, and it is of concern that we could not benefit from such a scheme for Kendal Street\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n
The new scheme on St John\u2019s Wood High Street<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

You can read more about that the transformation of St John\u2019s Wood High Street here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The council\u2019s previous plans that tackled the traffic were more popular<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The council previously put plans forward that included reducing traffic to one lane and one-way on Kendal Street. (In fact, it looked in parts rather like the St John\u2019s Wood High Street scheme above). This one-way would not only have achieved some traffic calming, it would also have left much more space for an increase in the pavements too. This plan was much more popular <\/strong>with locals- over half, 57% of respondents supported these plans. In addition, 35% more people supported this than opposed it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
Connaught Street (through-traffic not shown)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"\"
The proposed one-way on Kendal Street<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
Pictures of the council\u2019s previous plans. See map further up for position of Kendal street in relation to Connaught street.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Previous plans which tackled the traffic were nearly three times more popular with locals<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Just to clarify, 57% of respondents supported the previous plans<\/strong>, whereas only 19% of respondents supported this new watered-down scheme as-is<\/strong>. In other words, the previous plans that included traffic calming were three times more popular. They also had majority support.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You can read a number of the comments from locals about what they thought of the previous plan here in this previous piece on our site<\/a>, such as: \u201cBest thing the Council can do. VITAL\u201d, and \u201cTaking back local urban spaces from cars is in my view positive\u201d.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why was the plan that had majority support dropped?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Good question!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The previous plan which included reducing Kendal street to one-way had majority support. But it was binned- why? We understand that last autumn, a meeting went ahead at lunchtime during the week, when some councillors discussed the previous plan to reduce the traffic, and it apparently got quite heated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a previous piece we wrote this<\/a>: \u201cWe understand that it got quite heated and there was some anger. …\u201dA lot of the folks at this meeting just want Connaught Village to be a road\u201d says one local who went \u2026 \u201csome appeared to be non- locals who just wanted to still drive through the area\u201d\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

After this \u201cheated\u201d meeting, Councillors sent an email to local residents<\/a>. \u201cGenerally, the project has been very well received\u201d they said. \u201cHowever, a large number of residents raised concerns about the traffic impacts from the proposed one-way working on Kendal Street. We held a drop-in session \u2026. As a result of the very strong views expressed, we have asked the Highways Team (to maintain) two-way traffic along Kendal Street\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n
Screenshots of email where councillors admit to dropping plans to tackling the traffic due to some anger at a local meeting \u2026 (we took these shots in case they take the link down)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

So just to be clear, in the council\u2019s own words, they have said they dropped the plans to tackle the traffic because people were angry at a meeting. A meeting held in the middle of the day that only a handful of local residents could attend. This was despite getting majority support, and many comments of people supporting it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Freshminster\u2019s view, is that many dozens of people are clearly angry that the traffic is NOT being tackled now. And that by trying to please everyone, the council are pleasing no-one. It is a very disappointing legacy, especially when over a million pounds is being spent. We urge the council to reconsider, and go for a more ambitious plan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As we have mentioned, at the time of the previous plan, local resident association HyPER said they were hoping the scheme would go further and presented other ideas<\/a>, so one can imagine how they feel about all plans to tackle the traffic being dropped.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cWe\u2019re disappointed that out of a scheme that\u2019s costing \u00a31.4 million, the main problem (i.e. the traffic) is not being tackled. We saw how much people enjoyed our parklet and how much local people wish the street was quieter and safer, and there\u2019s only one way to do this, which is tackling the traffic.\u201d<\/p>\nHyPER – Hyde Park Estate Residents<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

We have seen for ourselves that a village square has been a very effective way to encourage the building of local community, and to support local business, as demonstrated in this piece we wrote on Belsize Park Village<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We have gone through the comments to the latest consultation in detail, and have pulled out a lot of them, which are below \u2026 It is clear to us that tackling the traffic is a mainstream, popular view, and that councillors need to find some political will, and do what residents actually want.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A selection of comments from the consultation<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Many found the new plans disappointing<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n

\u201cI have to say that I am disappointed with (the) proposal compared with the original scheme sent to us\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cThe proposed scheme for Connaught Village is half-hearted and too limited in scope\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cIt delivers almost nothing of substance to the businesses and the people who rely on Connaught Street to live and work and does not support the local businesses in generating a positive environment\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cMany reasonable individuals may be opposed on the grounds that this is too little value for the money — they would not be wrong\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cI\u2019m disappointed to see this scheme get scaled back at every iteration\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

People wanted the plans to go further<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n

\u201cI\u2019d like you to be even more ambitious in discouraging private motor vehicles and encouraging active modes of transport\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cThe plans do not go near far enough. The number one issue is traffic – and it does nothing to deal with this. I’d urge a rethink\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

There was one problem here that\u2019s mentioned time and time again \u2026 the Traffic<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n

\u201cI support road traffic calming measures. This is badly needed. Connaught Street is a polluted rat run at times. Vehicles regularly ignore the zebra crossing making crossings unsafe\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cThe proposal \u2026 does nothing to reduce the Rat Run of vehicles that use Connaught Village to drive at speeds all hours of the day. This is not a neighbourhood due to this road; it is simply a traffic highway\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cWithout any meaningful change in traffic volume, this proposal appears set to become another “Mound” debacle\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cIt would appear as if the council is flush with money but short on political courage\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cI expect that the Connaught Green project, on its own, will have no impact on the volume of traffic running through our high street. This is the single biggest issue facing our declining, cherished high street\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cIronically, on February 21st, during a 5-min stop with on the Green sight, I saw one driver angrily honk and yell at a cyclist for slowing them down, and another cyclist actually get hit at the Connaught Street zebra crossing, just as we were discussing the proposal. I’m afraid this kind of anti- social behaviour will only continue in the future\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cI am strongly in support for a Village Green combined with meaningful traffic flow changes (but) I feel that the proposal falls significantly short of the primary objectives to reduce\/calm traffic flows and provide a meaningful public amenity that might enhance the Village atmosphere and support local businesses through increased footfall\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Will the propose raised tables be enough to tackle it?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n

\u201cI hope that the raised table is sufficiently aggressive as to meaningfully reduce the brazen anti- social driving behaviour on Connaught St\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Many lamented the fact that plans were dropped to make Kendal Street one-way<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n

\u201cThe junction between Kendal Street and Connaught Street is an extremely dangerous area. Traffic is coming from multiple directions, with many sight lines obscured by the curve of the road or by trees\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cThe proposals for Connaught Village as now amended are wholly unacceptable. \u2026 The only sensible way of introducing this scheme is by having the previous proposal for a much narrower entry point into the south end of Kendal St, thereby slowing traffic, and with Kendal Street pavements widened\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cI am disappointed that Kendal Street will remain two way and I cannot understand why residents (and businesses) should favour a continuous flow of through traffic (a rat run) over the safety of pedestrians and the relative calm of the village\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cThis is a missed opportunity. Why not either (1) make the village one way throughout; and\/or (2) remove access from Edgware Road to both Kendal St and Connaught St?\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cI’m concerned that Kendal Street is to remain 2-way, and I believe ‘a bollard’ will simply serve to spoil the aesthetic of the new green\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

People wanted more of a village green\/piazza<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n

\u201cThe point of the scheme was to create a village centre and this does nothing of the sort. It is a complete waste of money. At the very minimum Kendal St should be narrowed\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cThe proposal to close Connaught Street and to create a Piazza is the one that has broad support in the community, in particular with the businesses which need pedestrian footfall to sustain business\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cThe plans are a missed opportunity to make even more public space along Titchborne Row. For trees and seating and even a playground, as there is already a lot of parking in the area\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cThe Village Green design is underwhelming in design and scope\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Some mention St John\u2019s Wood High Street as a good model<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n

\u201cThe new one-way system in St Johns Wood High Street has worked to improve the area, both for pedestrians and business, and it is of concern that we could not benefit from such a scheme for Kendal Street\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cThe council has shown better ideas for Oxford St, Regent St, Queensway, Marylebone, St John’s Wood high street — it knows what needs to be done to make this high street better. This isn’t it\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cWe urge the council to reconsider, and reflect what residents want, setting a legacy in place that they will be celebrated for.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

You can read the results for yourself here<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u201cI expect that the Connaught Green project, on its own, will have no impact on the volume of traffic running through our high street. This is the single biggest issue facing our declining, cherished high street\u201d. \u201cWithout any meaningful change in traffic volume, this proposal appears set to become another “Mound” debacle\u201d. Westminster Council has … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":418,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/freshminster.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/399"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/freshminster.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/freshminster.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/freshminster.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/freshminster.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=399"}],"version-history":[{"count":24,"href":"https:\/\/freshminster.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/399\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":441,"href":"https:\/\/freshminster.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/399\/revisions\/441"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/freshminster.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/418"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/freshminster.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=399"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/freshminster.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=399"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/freshminster.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=399"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}