liquidindian
Hello
Okay good to know you've had to deny this before.
Brixton Liveable Neighbourhood and LTN schemes - improvements for pedestrians and cyclists
- Thread starter teuchter
- Start date
sleaterkinney
Well-Known Member
If they have done an impact assessment, what are they going to court over??
teuchter
je suis teuchter
I assume that One Lambeth's lawyers will argue that the assessment was not done properly and failed to recognise the impact it would have on the case "client" and/or mitigate that impact.
BigTom
Well-Known Member
Essentially yes, but it includes any form of travel that involves physical activity so it also includes jogging, running (yes, there have been attempts to encourage people to jog/run on their commute rather than drive) and other non-bicycle human powered vehicles like manual scooters, skateboards/longboards/etc. Also anything else that some fool chooses to use to travel in a physically active fashion, but you're not going to get councils trying to get people onto pogo sticks or anything like that. Would count though.
In reality it's walking & cycling because the other forms are so vanishingly small it's not really relevant.
snowy_again
Slush
It’s a public health England phrase from years ago - not new or puritanical just what I remember we used to do before the advent of ‘car over everything’ culture. Eg 2016 PHE guidance paper:
Which sits under a wider sustainable development and environmental management plan. None of this is new.
www.gov.uk
And has been a priority of national, regional and local govt for a long time. National funding bodies recognised the health and environmental impact of it too: Active travel | Sport England
And started working out the long term health benefits of reducing car trip dependency on the NHS etc.
“
Increasing levels of physical activity is central to improving the nation’s health and wellbeing, and active travel - which is the everyday journeys we make to get from place to place, like cycling to work - is widely viewed as having the potential to play a major part in that mission.
The evidence base on the link between active travel and physical activity is extensive, wide-ranging in terms of the interventions reviewed, exhibits variable degrees of rigour, and can be interpreted in different ways. In particular, the volume of available material has grown considerably in recent years and are expected to continue to grow in coming years. “
Which sits under a wider sustainable development and environmental management plan. None of this is new.
Sustainability and public health: a guide to good practice
Guidance and advice on sustainable development and environmental management for the benefit of public health.
And has been a priority of national, regional and local govt for a long time. National funding bodies recognised the health and environmental impact of it too: Active travel | Sport England
And started working out the long term health benefits of reducing car trip dependency on the NHS etc.
“
Increasing levels of physical activity is central to improving the nation’s health and wellbeing, and active travel - which is the everyday journeys we make to get from place to place, like cycling to work - is widely viewed as having the potential to play a major part in that mission.
The evidence base on the link between active travel and physical activity is extensive, wide-ranging in terms of the interventions reviewed, exhibits variable degrees of rigour, and can be interpreted in different ways. In particular, the volume of available material has grown considerably in recent years and are expected to continue to grow in coming years. “
teuchter
je suis teuchter
"Active travel" forms at least a part of most Londoners' normal journeys to work and elsewhere already. Whether they cycle all the way, or walk to the tube station. It's the way most people in the Brixton area get around when they are not on a tube, train, or bus. It's not reserved for a select group of athletes or people wearing certain types of clothing [insert tired cyclist cliches here].
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Deny what?
liquidindian
Hello
That you would only say something because it's in the Telegraph.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Think you need to have a read of this thread before you start having a go.
liquidindian
Hello
I read your posts deliberately misunderstanding what someone meant by "privilege". I'm not sure I need to go back further tbh.
liquidindian
Hello
I'm not sure what's controversial. The council has a duty to consider human rights, so you could write an article on pretty much every council decision ever made: XXX may interfere in human rights’ of residents, council admits. Stevie Bird from the Telegraph has picked this decision, for some reason.
Edit: Not Bird, I just assumed. I guess he only gets to republish his article on LTNs every Sunday.
Edit: Not Bird, I just assumed. I guess he only gets to republish his article on LTNs every Sunday.
colacubes
Mr Hot Cookie
I mean come on. This sort of bad faith nonsense doesn't do anyone any favours. Actually if you read this forum you'd find that Gramsci is an intelligent thoughtful poster who has been massively involved in the local politics of Brixton in a hugely positive way. I'd do him the favour of reading his posts and not rocking up as a new poster and just being an argumentative arsehole for the sake of it.
As it happens I'm massively pro LTNs and disagree with him on this (although not about Lambeth's incompetence re consultation which has been woeful for years). But this kind of bad faith, adversarial argumentativeness is just unnecessary. You should always bear in mind the pub analogy online - you wouldn't just walk into a pub and start having a row with one of the regulars because even if the other regulars thought they were an arsehole, they'd probably still more likely side with them. This isn't twitter. Maybe just be a little more open to listening and arguing your points in good faith.
liquidindian
Hello
I'll take your word that I joined at an unfortunate moment.
editor
hiraethified
It's not your timing that's the problem. It's your needlessly adversarial attitude.
liquidindian
Hello
No it isn't.
(I guess a haughty "you're new here" when I point out a Telegraph article is based on nothing much is not adversarial)
(I guess a haughty "you're new here" when I point out a Telegraph article is based on nothing much is not adversarial)
Last edited:
colacubes
Mr Hot Cookie
Actually:
1. It isn’t cos you are actually new.
2. Your initial post and reaction showed you hadn’t read the thread up to that point. Including Gramsci’s posting style.
What you fail to understand is that this is not Twitter. This is not a One Lambeth Facebook group. This is a genuine community forum trying to argue out the issues. Many people here know each other and are friends in real life. We sometimes disagree. We argue in a robust way, but in the sense of a familiarity and solidarity that is there from years of interaction. You don’t get to rock up and argue in bad faith here. And I find it disingenuous and unpleasant when people do it on either side of the argument.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Your mis-step was, I think, only to imply that Gramsci was basing his opinions on what's written in the telegraph. I'm fairly confident that's not true and so would be anyone who's posted here for a while.
I can see why you might think Gramsci was deliberately misinterpreting what I meant when using the word privilege earlier in the thread; I wasn't too keen on that myself.
I'd say take a small step back and then carry on with a little more caution until you've got the measure of things.
liquidindian
Hello
Fair, I'll do that. Apologies to Gramsci. I don't think they were fair on me but I was maybe less fair on them, and leapt to conclusions.
(And I think you'll find I've failed to understand that here isn't Facebook, actually, not Twitter)
(And I think you'll find I've failed to understand that here isn't Facebook, actually, not Twitter)
Ol Nick
beer in Brixton
Honestly getting into a fight with Gramsci or Teuchter (ideally both) is practically a rite of passage and in no way discouraged. The key is giving each other the benefit of the doubt if what we say sounds a bit off.
And remember our true enemy. The People’s Front of OneLambath
(Sometimes I miss the chilled-out days of IntoStella and Anna Key)
teuchter
je suis teuchter
It's notable how many of these arguments against the LTN concept seem to simply state as fact that they result in an increase in pollution - yet as far as I know, there's basically no direct evidence of that at all. The closest there is, is some evidence that congestion or number of vehicles on some perimeter routes is raised by quite a small amount on what may or may not be a short term basis. And from there you have to infer that air pollution goes up in proportion.
There’s also no evidence that Streatham residents are overwhelmingly against the schemes.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
London actually has followed a rather different path than the rest of the UK - peaked around 2000 and has been moderately successful in gradually reducing it since then. Although this graph only goes to 2011 - I think things have changed somewhat since then.
editor
hiraethified
I certainly miss their left wing politics at times, although I'm not sure if I'd describe them as chilled out
nick
Pleomorphic Adenomas R us
Attach files
ditto HatboyI certainly miss their left wing politics at times, although I'm not sure if I'd describe them as chilled out
editor
hiraethified
Definitely. The Brixton forum's shift to the right has been a thoroughly depressing thing to witness.
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
Paris has the right idea:
www.bloomberg.com
Paris Will Ban Through Traffic in City Center
Mayor Anne Hidalgo’s latest effort to rein in car use and fight pollution would prevent non-residents from driving across the French capital's historic heart in 2022.
www.bloomberg.com
Similar threads
