Issues:
- There is currently a discrepancy between the hours when the market operates (7 am-7 pm) and the hours when motor traffic is excluded (10:30 am – 2:30 pm).
- Many motor vehicles disobey the exclusions
Camden proposes the following changes:
- Set both market hours and traffic restriction times to 8am – 4:30pm
- Close Leather Lane to motor traffic at the junction with Clerkenwell Road with bollards (except for cycles and emergency services); make Leather Lane two-way north of Hatton Wall to allow for turning round. (Consultation to follow on measures for Clerkenwell Road)
- Install ‘drop-down’ bollards (for timed closures) at the junctions of Leather Lane and St Cross Street and Hatton Wall.
- Close Baldwin’s Gardens (at all times) to motor vehicle through traffic at the junction with Leather Lane (it can still be accessed from Gray’s Inn Road). (School Street for St Albans CofE school to be consulted separately)
- Allow cycles to enter Leather Lane from Greville Street
- Add double yellow lines at the junctions with Baldwin’s Gardens, St Cross Street and Hatton Wall.
Notes:
- Greville Street is two-way west of Hatton Garden but has a No Entry about 25m east of Leather Lane. We assume there will be an exception to that No Entry. This will be useful for access to the ‘pedestrian way’ between Leather lane and High Holborn.
- Hard to find cycle parking (e.g. to visit LCC offices) on Baldwin’s Gardens and vicinity.
- The section between Greville Street and Holborn has official No Motor Vehicle signs (i.e. cycling permitted) but also non-standard signs saying ‘Pedestrians Only’ and ‘Cyclists and e-Scooters please dismount’ (https://bit.ly/3Qw5KRB). But that sign was not there in 2019. At the southern end there is a dropped kerb and Keep Clear to provide a cycle crossing to Fetter Lane – the footway here has shared space logos on the bollards. Leather Lane has the same non-standard signs (which we are guessing probably are not enforceable).
Leather Lane used to be a good cycle route – we should take this opportunity to try to get it re-instated. - Parking opportunities:
- Portpool Lane, St Cross Street, Baldwin’s Gardens (difficult but needed), Dorrington Street
- Greville Street (add to the huge DSHB space, which has no parking for conventional bikes)
- But the best opportunity is on the large space opposite Greville Street. This is part-owned by the Waterhouse building, which is to be redeveloped. We had a conversation with the developers about the use of this space for cycle parking but it would be worth mentioning in our response.
Consultation on Camden’s website
CCC Response to Leather Lane consultation
Drawing:
CCC’s response
CCC response to Leather Lane consultation (21 Nov)
Decision
https://democracy.camden.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?Id=4389
From officers report:
7.2 Camden Cycling Campaign (CCC)
…
CCC raised the issue that there are non-standard signs on Greville Street, at the junction with Leather Lane, which say ‘pedestrians only’ and ‘cyclist and e-scooters please dismount’. CCC request that the non-standard signs are removed.
Officers note the issue raised and will investigate during the detailed design stage.
CCC request the installation of cycle parking / stands at locations within the Leather Lane area.
Officers note the request and will investigate the introduction of cycle parking during the detailed design stage.
But we sent in an amended response on 21 Nov (as above) which included the following new paragraph:
Contraflow cycling on Leather Lane north of Greville Street
The proposal for Grevillle Street will allow cycles to access the section of Leather Lane leading up to Baldwin’s Gardens and St Cross Street. In addition, it would be really useful to have two-way cycling right through Leather Lane up to Clerkenwell Road.
We would like to add a request for two-way cycling right through Leather Lane to our response of 10th November, including providing a cycle exemption to the No Entry and No Right Turn signs at the junction of Leather Lane and St Cross Street and to the direction sign facing Baldwin’s Gardens (unless it is removed as part of the proposals).
Although PA acknowledged this, it hasn’t been taken into account.
