which is what should have happened originally, as it fucks off most of oneschill’s objections and done sensibly ( it won’t be ) crushes rat running w/o affecting residents.
alex
Brixton Liveable Neighbourhood and LTN schemes - improvements for pedestrians and cyclists
- Thread starter teuchter
- Start date
which is what should have happened originally, as it fucks off most of oneschill’s objections and done sensibly ( it won’t be ) crushes rat running w/o affecting residents.
alex
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
What's needed is both. Cameras alone don't stop cars speeding through. You need physical barriers also, with cameras to catch those that drive round/through them.
if someone wants to pay 100 quid a time to Lambeth to rat run down my street, I’m ok with that - it’s not like they’ll do it more than a couple of times and if they do it’s not like Lambeth don’t need the money - they can spend it on traffic calming.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
This has all been discussed before but it depends what you want to get out of the LTNs - whether you only want to deal with 'rat-running' or whether you want to use them to change people's travel habits, including those within the LTNs.
But because they’ve tried to deal with every problem they’ve been easy to paint as being high impact, picking off rat running - then deal with the rest over 5 years would have been much easier to implement.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
I don't know but I'm not sure it would have met with much less resistance. It would only remove some of the objections. And then you'd have to go through it all again a few years down the line. And (if you believe in them) these changes need to happen quite urgently.
Jeanette Moo
Active Member
I think a slow and steady approach which addressed small areas one by one, withmeasurement and consultation would have been successful. Divide and conquer. No one would have noticed or been inclined to care if a small LTN popped up somewhere.
Instead the big bang approach has caused concern, issues and all the groups to pop up. But I get it, money was made available and it had to be used.
Instead the big bang approach has caused concern, issues and all the groups to pop up. But I get it, money was made available and it had to be used.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
If you define 'success' as a scattering of small, half-baked schemes implemented 5 or 10 years from now, then yeah.
thebackrow
Considerably more Brixton.
Although of course Lambeth's LTNs are already seeing cameras repeatedly vandalised and drivers covering up their plates before driving through. I think the estimate is that 10% of London's drivers are uninsured and I'd guess a similar number unregistered or to a fake name or address. Plus drivers on cloned or overseas plates - I'm guessing a fair few of the blacked out window crew who drive round Brixton at speed are illegal in one way or another.
You don't any of those problems with full closures of the roads as was done in Waltham Forest and where there was no impact on fire or ambulance response times.
Last edited:
Brian Taylor
Active Member
It's interesting that at the outset Lambeth claimed it was all to do with COVID and that's why there wasn't any consultation.
When I spoke to a local Labour councillor at the end of the summer she didn't make any attempt to defend the LTN and just kept blaming it all on the Tory government and how 'they made us do it!'.
Now you've got the Sutton LibDems saying the same thing and using the TfL judgement as an excuse to stop and start consultations.
Wonder which version is closer to the truth.
Both avoid the obvious comment that they could just have said NO.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
These "parklets" don't come cheap. Father Nature is one business that has done well out of LTNs.
I thought reason to bring in these changes to roads now was the pandemic. More space for cycling and pedestrians.
These parklets are not going to encourage social distancing. So I wonder what the justification for them is.
See something similar happening in Ragent street and LJ. Large planters have appeared on the pavements. Regent st pavement was widened. Reason gven that people need wider pavements to be able to socially distance. Now in last few days large planters have been put in where the pavement was widened. Defeating the object of widening the pavement to help social distancing.
Brian Taylor
Active Member
The planters on the pavement at LJ are a few feet from big signs warning of road narrowing to make more room for pedestrians.
A neighbour put some of that yellow tape with the 2 metre warning message on the "parklet" as a reminder to people, his partner works for the NHS in the thick of it. He'll probably be accused of vandalism.
snowy_again
Slush
You see determined to confuse different schemes
Regent street changes are led by The Crown Estate and LB Westminster, not TFL or Shapps.
It’s been a long time in the planning of it - way before Covid, but is being spun recently as helping that street recover. You can see the plans and the trees here,
www.thecrownestate.co.uk
I don’t think those trees are going to stop social distancing but clearly you do.
LJ new planters - likewise is an urban greening scheme. Part of the Mayor’s Greener Cities fund.
Father nature remains as far as I know - let me know if you know anything different, an award winning not for profit organisation which trains and mentors people alongside the construction work - which could explain why they don’t just knock together some non FSC accredited bit of wood from acre lane timber and why seeing just the capital outlay is wrong. Plus there’s that thing about paying a decent wage for an honest days work, contributing towards a not for profits’ overheads etc.
It’s quite easy to google that; Father Nature Archives - Father Nature
Regent street changes are led by The Crown Estate and LB Westminster, not TFL or Shapps.
It’s been a long time in the planning of it - way before Covid, but is being spun recently as helping that street recover. You can see the plans and the trees here,
News
Find the latest news from The Crown Estate: corporate news and press releases from across our portfolio - Marine, Property & Places, Land and The Windsor Estate.
www.thecrownestate.co.uk
I don’t think those trees are going to stop social distancing but clearly you do.
LJ new planters - likewise is an urban greening scheme. Part of the Mayor’s Greener Cities fund.
Father nature remains as far as I know - let me know if you know anything different, an award winning not for profit organisation which trains and mentors people alongside the construction work - which could explain why they don’t just knock together some non FSC accredited bit of wood from acre lane timber and why seeing just the capital outlay is wrong. Plus there’s that thing about paying a decent wage for an honest days work, contributing towards a not for profits’ overheads etc.
It’s quite easy to google that; Father Nature Archives - Father Nature
editor
hiraethified
Most of the increased pedestrian space on roads that was created for the pandemic have now disappeared, which seems daft given how bad the infection rate has been up until very recently.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
It doesn't say that's what's driving the scheme. Obviously it's going to mention it as a benefit, if the scheme completes at a time where we may still need to encourage social distancing for a while.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
It says to support social distancing. I can't see what else that means except for the pandemic.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
The one is LJ is still under the Railway bridge. It does not work as its a mess now.
snowy_again
Slush
Yes, it’s permanent because it was a pre covid planned work by the crown estate & Westminster to improve those streets (and to protect their retail space). Just because a press officer had squeezed a bit of covid into the press release to get some attention from the media doesn’t mean that’s its only purpose.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
It is what the official website says. The one you posted up to prove your point. You are now saying its wrong.
snowy_again
Slush
No, I’m not saying it’s wrong. I’m saying it’s not the primary purpose of the refurb.
Do you think it takes < 12 months to consult, plan, design and construct new pavements and road layouts on a street that is entirely listed for its architectural heritage, and that coincidentally happens just after its 200 year anniversary?
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Did you edit your orginal post? Press release seems to have gone?
snowy_again
Slush
Post #3764? No - but in quoting it whilst using a mobile the link seemed to disappear.
thebackrow
Considerably more Brixton.
Largely because risk of virus transmission in well ventilated outdoor space is very very low. Sitting opposite someone at a pub table on a still day for an hour might not be a good idea, but passing people in the street at less that 2m has never been shown to be a material risk. And most of the temporary pavement widening schemes - at least those that didn't create a level, kerb free, pavement didn't really work for anyone.
Catching coronavirus outside is rare but not impossible
Almost all documented coronavirus transmissions have occurred indoors, but experts say that wearing a mask outside is justified because there is still a risk of infection.
Last edited:
thebackrow
Considerably more Brixton.
I'm intrigued - do you think Regent Street was better for pedestrians - the main users of the street - with 4 lanes of motor traffic or two?
sleaterkinney
Well-Known Member
If you go back to the start of the thread you'll see these schemes were planned long before covid and have value in their own right. Covid just gave them more impetus.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
At local neighbourhood meeting a Cllr said they had to put in place these schemes as the government told them to spend the money quickly. So yes the line when under pressure from Cllrs is "they made us do it". This was in response to asking about lack of consultation. Line being the Cllr would have preferred to consult more but the Tories made us spend the money on these schemes quickly.
Of course they could have taken the political decision to say no.
Or they could have taken decision to put in place really temporary schemes and not use any Experimental Traffic Orders. They had powers under pandemic to introduce temporary social distancing measures as at LJ. I wasn't arguing with that.
My impression is that senior officers and some senior officers thought pandemic was once in a lifetime oppurtunity to fast track finishing working up and implementing pet schemes.
Fact that backbench Cllrs have caught the flack has led to what you and I have heard some of these Cllrs say. In some ways not backbbench Cllrs fault. The Progress led Council is so tightly run from the top that the poor old back bench Cllr is caught between the Chief Whip and angry constituents.
Last edited:
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Im sure Crown Estate have been planning this. There has been a load of work on New Bond Street / Burlington Gardens to widen pavements / make roads more pedestrian friendly.
What appears to have happened is that the pandemic has been used to fast track the Regent street proposals. Intially the temporary barriers were Khans Streets Space blue barriers. ie a temporary widening of pavement last year. In run up to Christmas this made sense as it looked like the economy would be opened up a bit and Christmas shoppers would be encouraged to come to shop.
This did not happen- no ones fault.
Then I saw builders making the temporary widening permanent.
I did not understand this as by then it was obvious that no one would be coming to Regent street to shop for months.
The Crown Estate press release sums up my whole issue with the roll out of these schemes.
Councils / large organisations always have projects in the pipeline. Some make it to fruiton some don't.
My criticism is that pandemic is being used by fast track projects.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Regent street pavements were wide enough for pedestrians between Oxford Circus and Piccadilly pre pandemic.
The problem area was around Oxford Circus.
At rush hour ( pre pandemic) and during Christmas shopping period it was always at times an over crowded bottleneck. People coming in and out of tube did not help. Not sure what can be done about that.
So no given my experience of Regent street I do not think permanent pavement widening on that stretch is necessary.
Similar threads
