Proposed traffic restrictions for Battersea Church Road
Added on: 23 May 2020 at 10:16:55
Response from the Battersea Society.
Background
This is set out in strategy paper 20.056 presented to the Strategic Planning and Transportation Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 5 February 2020. We note from this that the proposals are a response to a petition by 162 residents of Battersea Church Road. We further note that there appears to have been so far no direct consultation with Transport for London (TfL). The paper casts doubt on their willingness to accept these limited proposals – albeit that ‘it is also proposed to develop improvement plans along Westbridge Road to accommodate potential displaced traffic from Battersea Church Road’.
While we acknowledge the very proper concerns of this group of residents it is not appropriate for the Council to restrict their work to such a narrow part of a heavily congested area within St. Mary’s Park Ward. We and others have repeatedly drawn the Council’s attention to the congestion in this area, in particular at the junctions between Battersea Church Road, Westbridge Road and Battersea Bridge Road.
Response
There is a need for wider traffic modelling of the impact of these proposals.
We are concerned that the impact of these options on other traffic flows, both in the study area and on the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) has not been modelled and this is essential before any changes are made to a single road within the area.
Future pressure on road traffic
Any measures need to be set in the context of the considerable development planned and underway within the ward. These include in particular the Winstanley, York Road and Lombard Road developments approved or being built. Consideration should extend to added traffic resulting from the Council’s Crewkerne Garages development, both in the short-term as it is being built and from residential traffic in the future. The RCA development may increase traffic as will the eventual development of the Ransome’s Dock area. The addition of a secondary school to the Thomas’s estate also needs to be considered.
Conclusion
There needs to be considerably more work done before any limited change is introduced.
The Council should seek to develop, in partnership with TfL, a better evidenced plan designed to work for the benefit of the whole area and other traffic passing through this section of Battersea Bridge Road. This should take note of all current and future developments within the St. Mary’s Park Ward and the council’s planning policy for the area. It should take note of other traffic studies planned including that for York Road and work planned along the Battersea Park Road/Nine Elms corridor.
