Brixton Liveable Neighbourhood and LTN schemes - improvements for pedestrians and cyclists

[editor]

Update Lambeth LTNs: ‘Rain fails to wash away cycling boom in Brixton’ claims local study

 

[madolesance]

This is worth engaging in- Annual Road User Survey 2020/2021
Some very loaded questions but worth getting creative.

 

[teuchter]

Interesting and maybe sort of relevant

Why Highway Teardowns Make Great Infrastructure (and Equity) Investments — Streetsblog USA

Progressive advocates are making the case that new infrastructure money would actually be best spent tearing urban highways down — and reinvesting in the Black and brown communities that those bad road projects tore apart decades ago.

usa.streetsblog.org

In a groundbreaking new policy proposal, nonprofits Transportation for America and Third Way recommended that the next administration create a new, $5-billion competitive grant program that states could draw on to tear down their misguided downtown highways and redevelop the land that’s left behind in better ways.


But notably, the proposal also specifies that all that newly highway-free land would be held in trust for the benefit of the communities that surround it — communities that, often, are the direct descendants of Black and brown residents whose lives were upended when the highways were built in the first place. The groups say spending the money is essential to maximizing the antiracist potential of the major transportation investment.


“[The land trust idea] is really key to regenerating wealth in communities that highway projects helped bankrupt in the first place,” said Alex Laska, transportation policy adviser at Third Way. “It’s really important to talk about not just the economic benefits of highway removal, but how to make sure that the people who already live there see that benefit.”

 

[Jeanette Moo]

Update Lambeth LTNs: ‘Rain fails to wash away cycling boom in Brixton’ claims local study

A very local study. One road

 

[Brian Taylor]

A very local study. One road

and one very highly motivated man with a clipboard and a pencil standing there for a whole hour once a month. 4 times. A rigorous and thorough survey indeed. Good to see he's now appointed himself as a survey designer on top of his role as a self appointed community leader.

 

[thebackrow]

and one very highly motivated man with a clipboard and a pencil standing there for a whole hour once a month. 4 times. A rigorous and thorough survey indeed. Good to see he's now appointed himself as a survey designer on top of his role as a self appointed community leader.

I'm guessing the anti campaign are just sticking with to pulling up plants, vandalising the planters and signs and a few unverifiable and exaggerated anecdotes?

 

[Brian Taylor]

I'm guessing the anti campaign are just sticking with to pulling up plants, vandalising the planters and signs and a few unverifiable and exaggerated anecdotes?

I wouldn't know, I've never pulled up a plant or vandalised anything. Aren't most stories of a personal experience difficult to verify and prone to exaggeration? As for signs, you can ask the survey designer - he was running round the area sticking signs up on lampposts not that long ago. Spend more time on that than he has on his 'survey'.

 

[thebackrow]

I wouldn't know, I've never pulled up a plant or vandalised anything. Aren't most stories of a personal experience difficult to verify and prone to exaggeration? As for signs, you can ask the survey designer - he was running round the area sticking signs up on lampposts not that long ago. Spend more time on that than he has on his 'survey'.

Yes, it's why decisions are generally made based on data not 'lived experience' or whatever you want to call it.

 

[Brian Taylor]

Yes, it's why decisions are generally made based on data not 'lived experience' or whatever you want to call it.

and for once... we agree

 

[editor]

and one very highly motivated man with a clipboard and a pencil standing there for a whole hour once a month. 4 times. A rigorous and thorough survey indeed. Good to see he's now appointed himself as a survey designer on top of his role as a self appointed community leader.

Are you part of OneLambeth? If so, could you ask then why I've been banned from the group. For a group that bangs on about democracy they sure seem to be ready to exclude anyone who isn't towing the party line.

 

[Rushy]

I'm guessing the anti campaign are just sticking with to pulling up plants, vandalising the planters and signs and a few unverifiable and exaggerated anecdotes?

Is this guess based on data or on your lived experience or whatever you want to call it?

 

[Brian Taylor]

Are you part of OneLambeth? If so, could you ask then why I've been banned from the group. For a group that bangs on about democracy they sure seem to be ready to exclude anyone who isn't towing the party line.

Someone asked me to join at the start and i did but i don't actually know any of the people who run it and, to be honest, i don't participate in it. I could post a general question as to why people are getting banned.

 

[editor]

Someone asked me to join at the start and i did but i don't actually know any of the people who run it and, to be honest, i don't participate in it. I could post a general question as to why people are getting banned.

Please do.

 

[Brian Taylor]

Are you part of OneLambeth? If so, could you ask then why I've been banned from the group. For a group that bangs on about democracy they sure seem to be ready to exclude anyone who isn't towing the party line.

I'm assuming there is a level of paranoia in there that goes back to the way people were being harassed and shouted down elsewhere. NextDoor was quite bad for that and that was where my invite came from. The Railton WhatsApp was pretty ugly at times too.

 

[Brian Taylor]

Please do.

Will do

 

[Brian Taylor]

Please do.

My post was declined with a message from an admin.
'People are asked if they support the LTNs or not. This is a place for those who do not'

Personally i don't agree with excluding people or censoring posts or questions, but it's a private group and it's up to them. In reality little different from the way Lambeth uses proxies to manage certain twitter feeds to keep them 'on message'.

Maybe i'll get banned for asking

 

[editor]

My post was declined with a message from an admin.
'People are asked if they support the LTNs or not. This is a place for those who do not'

Personally i don't agree with excluding people or censoring posts or questions, but it's a private group and it's up to them. In reality little different from the way Lambeth uses proxies to manage certain twitter feeds to keep them 'on message'.

Maybe i'll get banned for asking

Funny thing is that I hadn't expressed an opinion either way on that group. What a bunch of puffed up wankers.

 

[Jeanette Moo]

Were you invited by anyone? There was a comment months back when some one was banned along the lines of 'all posts removed, plus anyone they invited'. That was someone who was being toxic and encouraging vandalism.

 

[Brian Taylor]

Funny thing is that I hadn't expressed an opinion either way on that group. What a bunch of puffed up wankers.

Sadly this is what it's come to. So damn divisive and depressing.

 

[teuchter]

Were you invited by anyone? There was a comment months back when some one was banned along the lines of 'all posts removed, plus anyone they invited'. That was someone who was being toxic and encouraging vandalism.

They must have changed their policy on that, because in the couple of weeks before I got booted off, I was reading quite a few posts explicitly condoning vandalism, or "direct action" depending on your preferred term.

 

[editor]

Were you invited by anyone? There was a comment months back when some one was banned along the lines of 'all posts removed, plus anyone they invited'. That was someone who was being toxic and encouraging vandalism.

I joined ages, and maybe contributed a handful of fairly neutral posts weeks ago. And the found out that I'd been booted off. What a bunch of utterly pathetic twats. They've lost all sympathy from me.

 

[thebackrow]

Is this guess based on data or on your lived experience or whatever you want to call it?

They must have changed their policy on that, because in the couple of weeks before I got booted off, I was reading quite a few posts explicitly condoning vandalism, or "direct action" depending on your preferred term.

 

[Jeanette Moo]

They must have changed their policy on that, because in the couple of weeks before I got booted off, I was reading quite a few posts explicitly condoning vandalism, or "direct action" depending on your preferred term.

Well on whatsapp the people I speak to say new posts are pre-moderated but comments are not. People report any comments about vandalism or that are too toxic and they get eventually deleted.

Compared to the other groups i'm on Lambeth is tame. North of the river groups seem to be a cesspit and I left all but one for that reason.

 

[teuchter]

Well on whatsapp the people I speak to say new posts are pre-moderated but comments are not. People report any comments about vandalism or that are too toxic and they get eventually deleted.

Compared to the other groups i'm on Lambeth is tame. North of the river groups seem to be a cesspit and I left all but one for that reason.

All that can be said is that there are some people in the OneLambeth group who want to use "direct action" in the form of destroying the infrastructure as a way of opposing the LTNs. I would certainly agree that this does't mean that everyone in that group would take that view, and it could well be a minority view. I would not agree with tarring everyone who opposes LTNs with that brush.

But really, I'm not all that interested in what a minority of OneLambeth think, and to some extent it doesn't even matter what OneLambeth thinks in general, because its membership is only a tiny fraction of Lambeth's population.

What is of more interest to me is: of those who are "critical" of LTNs, what proportion of them simply don't buy or want the concept at all, and what proportion are only critical at the level of the specifics of how they have been implemented locally.

Rushy implied a few days ago that he thinks that most of the criticism comes from people who just want some more input into the detail of how the schemes are implemented at a local level. But when I asked what he bases that on, no answer was forthcoming.

Why does it matter? Because if the majority of the resistance comes from people who just want some adjustments to the way the schemes have been implemented, then it's certainly true that more extensive consultation and engagement would have a big impact on the success of the schemes.

But if the reality is, that the majority of the resistance comes from people who just don't want LTNs or anything of a similar concept at all, then consulation and engagement isn't going to make much difference. It more comes down to a numbers game of who does and doesn't want these kind of changes.

Well, my prejudice is that a very large proportion of resistance comes from people who just don't want the things, and aren't going to have their minds changed by argument or by 5 more years of consultations. In fact they are more likely to have their minds changed if the schemes are implemented, some time passes, and nothing terrible actually happens.

That's my prejudice, which of course is influenced by the fact that I do think they are a good idea in principle, and also results from my biased observations of the real world. It doesn't mean that I think that all objections to local details are groundless, nor does it mean that I think that all consultation and community engagement is a waste of time, nor does it mean that I think Lambeth are doing a great job in everything they are doing, much as some people would like to make out.

But I'm waiting to see some convincing evidence that there's a big load of people out there who would be getting behind these schemes if only they'd been consulted more. There was certainly zero evidence of that on the OneLambeth group but I don't make the assumption that they represent everyone who has "concerns".

 

[Rushy]

thebackrow

So neither data ; nor your own lived experience (whatever you think that is) ; but second hand lived experience of trolling a small group of angry folk on a Facebook page. Glad to see you keeping up to the standards you demand of others.

 

[Jeanette Moo]

All that can be said is that there are some people in the OneLambeth group who want to use "direct action" in the form of destroying the infrastructure as a way of opposing the LTNs. I would certainly agree that this does't mean that everyone in that group would take that view, and it could well be a minority view. I would not agree with tarring everyone who opposes LTNs with that brush.

But really, I'm not all that interested in what a minority of OneLambeth think, and to some extent it doesn't even matter what OneLambeth thinks in general, because its membership is only a tiny fraction of Lambeth's population.

What is of more interest to me is: of those who are "critical" of LTNs, what proportion of them simply don't buy or want the concept at all, and what proportion are only critical at the level of the specifics of how they have been implemented locally.

Rushy implied a few days ago that he thinks that most of the criticism comes from people who just want some more input into the detail of how the schemes are implemented at a local level. But when I asked what he bases that on, no answer was forthcoming.

Why does it matter? Because if the majority of the resistance comes from people who just want some adjustments to the way the schemes have been implemented, then it's certainly true that more extensive consultation and engagement would have a big impact on the success of the schemes.

But if the reality is, that the majority of the resistance comes from people who just don't want LTNs or anything of a similar concept at all, then consulation and engagement isn't going to make much difference. It more comes down to a numbers game of who does and doesn't want these kind of changes.

Well, my prejudice is that a very large proportion of resistance comes from people who just don't want the things, and aren't going to have their minds changed by argument or by 5 more years of consultations. In fact they are more likely to have their minds changed if the schemes are implemented, some time passes, and nothing terrible actually happens.

That's my prejudice, which of course is influenced by the fact that I do think they are a good idea in principle, and also results from my biased observations of the real world. It doesn't mean that I think that all objections to local details are groundless, nor does it mean that I think that all consultation and community engagement is a waste of time, nor does it mean that I think Lambeth are doing a great job in everything they are doing, much as some people would like to make out.

But I'm waiting to see some convincing evidence that there's a big load of people out there who would be getting behind these schemes if only they'd been consulted more. There was certainly zero evidence of that on the OneLambeth group but I don't make the assumption that they represent everyone who has "concerns".

The only person I have seen calling for direct action is the lady who was on the mic at the protests. Calling for things from protests, to not paying council tax to having marches. Only seen some pics of vadalism. I dont spend long on facebook, just a little in the evenings.

I can tell you that from someone who was at the LJ LTN meeting years ago - dont assume facebook is everything. I wasnt even on it when I heard about that meeting and we turned up 400 strong. I am surrounded by the elderly who are utterly bewildered by what is going and feel they have no say or voice. They don't have social media and those who have emailed are not happy with the canned responses. When or if councillor surgeries open theyre going to have a whole demographic waiting at the door, vaccinated or not.

Does having a group less than the population of Lambeth mean that anyone not in it is happy? How many out there have no idea? Don't use Facebook?

 

[teuchter]

The only person I have seen calling for direct action is the lady who was on the mic at the protests. Calling for things from protests, to not paying council tax to having marches. Only seen some pics of vadalism. I dont spend long on facebook, just a little in the evenings.

I can tell you that from someone who was at the LJ LTN meeting years ago - dont assume facebook is everything. I wasnt even on it when I heard about that meeting and we turned up 400 strong. I am surrounded by the elderly who are utterly bewildered by what is going and feel they have no say or voice. They don't have social media and those who have emailed are not happy with the canned responses. When or if councillor surgeries open theyre going to have a whole demographic waiting at the door, vaccinated or not.

Does having a group less than the population of Lambeth mean that anyone not in it is happy? How many out there have no idea? Don't use Facebook?

I don't assume facebook is everything. I was pretty much pointing out the opposite.

As for the LJ numbers. That "packed meeting" is frequently used as a means of implying it's incontrovertible that a majority of "local residents" didn't want the road changes. Well, 400 is nowhere near the majority of the population of even just the Loughborough Estate. The population of Coldharbour Ward is 17,000. Vassall Ward is 14,000.

And I was at that meeting too.

 

[Jeanette Moo]

I don't assume facebook is everything. I was pretty much pointing out the opposite.

As for the LJ numbers. That "packed meeting" is frequently used as a means of implying it's incontrovertible that a majority of "local residents" didn't want the road changes. Well, 400 is nowhere near the majority of the population of even just the Loughborough Estate. The population of Coldharbour Ward is 17,000. Vassall Ward is 14,000.

And I was at that meeting too.

But enough to show that there was enough concern raised and opposition to give pause. Whats being rolled out now is 10 fold LJ

 

[thebackrow]

Rushy implied a few days ago that he thinks that most of the criticism comes from people who just want some more input into the detail of how the schemes are implemented at a local level.
....
Why does it matter? Because if the majority of the resistance comes from people who just want some adjustments to the way the schemes have been implemented, then it's certainly true that more extensive consultation and engagement would have a big impact on the success of the schemes.
....
But I'm waiting to see some convincing evidence that there's a big load of people out there who would be getting behind these schemes if only they'd been consulted more. There was certainly zero evidence of that on the OneLambeth group but I don't make the assumption that they represent everyone who has "concerns".

One indicator would be if OneLambeth, or whoever else, were calling for specific changes (Not - 'residents should be exempt' - ie 'I'm fine with it so long as it doesn't affect my own driving in any way). I don't think I've seen a single post of someone saying "they've left a rat run here - that one needs to be stopped too" or "this area would work better if these roads were closed instead".

No, it's all "rip it all out" or "pause" (which seems to mean the same thing).

Is this guess based on data or on your lived experience or whatever you want to call it?

Someone seems to be repeatedly vandalising the planters in Railton as I've seen that they've been cleaned up a number of times before being vandalised again. And they seem to use 'OneLambeth' slogans which suggests they're engaged with the group in some way.
Likewise I've noticed that signs have been removed in Ferndale when I've cyded through, then I've been through when they had been replaced only to be taken down again. These are somewhat more binary verifiable observations than 'pollution is worse' or 'there are more cars on this road'.

 

[Rushy]

@Rushy implied a few days ago that he thinks that most of the criticism comes from people who just want some more input into the detail of how the schemes are implemented at a local level. But when I asked what he bases that on, no answer was forthcoming.

Wow - three times you have demanded a reply now!

If you go back and read what I wrote it was very specifically about the debate on this thread. Pro arguments are very macro. Critical arguments are much more hyper local because it is a hyper local forum. The two arguments don't mesh well. Unlike most of you I am not debating this anywhere else and I'm not all that interested to either - but from what you describe, the criticism on here is a world apart from arguments on the One thread which you so dutifully report back to us. Really the only person objecting on a macro level was Newbie and he hasn't posted for months. My post was neither directed to or specifically about you, so when you chose to ignore the context of my post I decided that it was not worth relying to. I'm sorry that I was unable to give you the attention that you felt you deserved on that occasion.