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

[Jeanette Moo]

The roads have changed and the generally structure in terms of what is using then. They haven’t put dropped kerbs in and, possibly more importantly, haven’t put in zebra crossing for wheelchair users in the appropriate places. They haven’t even thought of doing this

the LTNs have not been implemented with the benefit of proper impact assessments. I am against the implementation of something that doesn’t take into account vulnerable people.
they haven’t done assessments that are required under the Act. What I don’t understand is why the council won’t just follow the law and undertake full assessments. It doesn’t make sense. If you have the courage of you convictions you follow everything to the letter of the law and then implement your idea to the full extent allowed bu the law, you don’t ignore your obligations and just try to push things through

So in your last sentence....what happens if it was decided things were pushed through? It is seen as unlawful? WHat then?

Or is it a case of wait and see what the judge says? DO they have an opinion of the schemes or just the process?

 

[sleaterkinney]

The point someone else made was that stopping the spread of COVID was never the ppint of LTNs but it's all we heard when they were being put in. Now the narrative moves when such resistance is seen. That alone is the cause of much rage...the sheer cheek of it.

I agree with all the other points but what are we - coming up to a year in and still waiting for good results. How can it get better if it's this bad now and we are not even back to normal.

The narrative has not changed. LTNs have been around since the 70s ffs. COVID is another reason why they’re needed but it never was the only reason.

 

[chowce5382]

Hmm, courts deciding political decisions. Now where have we seen that before.

No. Courts deciding whether the decision making process of politicians is lawful or not. There is a big difference

 

[chowce5382]

So in your last sentence....what happens if it was decided things were pushed through? It is seen as unlawful? WHat then?

Or is it a case of wait and see what the judge says? DO they have an opinion of the schemes or just the process?

This is why we are going to court, these are very technical questions but with overriding humans rights issues. I know what it think but ultimately we decided to put ourselves in the hands of a judge so that we could see what is lawful or not. To me this seemed like the best outcome. We ask the experts whether the process is legal or not.

 

[Jeanette Moo]

The narrative has not changed. LTNs have been around since the 70s ffs. COVID is another reason why they’re needed but it never was the only reason.

I think you can understand when the average person was fed the line that LTNs were needed to help stop the spread of COVID. That was 100% my understanding as thats what they said.

Now we see they have been planned for a long time, don't actually help stop the spread of COVID, did not factor in many groups, have made life misery for many and approaching a year in are seeing misery while being fed 'thumbs up' reports about how much better life is when it isn't for those of us near main roads.

Why of why are people upset when they have been lied to and had their life turned into hell. It's a mystery i'm sure.

 

[chowce5382]

The narrative has not changed. LTNs have been around since the 70s ffs. COVID is another reason why they’re needed but it never was the only reason.

I think thatg point is that if you are using Covdi and the resultant funding to push through something quickly and without the correct procedures and you have to ask why corners are being cut and vulnerable people are not being supported and their interests not looked after by the council.

 

[chowce5382]

As far as I know, the court case is just against the way the decision was made, not the actual decision itself.

The decision and the ability to make it is a political one. The courts are not able to judge to political ideology. However, they can look at whether it was done lawfully. We live in a society where decisions made by the executive should be done lawfully. That is what the courts will be looking at. I think that we would all want to know whether a decision is lawful or not.

 

[chowce5382]

I think LTNs, reducing car use etc are a good enough thing by themselves, but COVID has made them needed even more, as we come out of lockdown people will be reluctant to use public transport and there isn’t enough space for those people to all drive. And there’s the pollution thing too - which was an issue before ltns.

They’re not trying to shift the narrative at all, COVID has given just another reason for them.

this is an interesting point.
1. as a result of covid and lockdown, people will be reluctant to use public transport.
2. there isn't enough space for those people deciding not to use public transport to drive.

council decides to reduce the number of cars on the road, therefore, pushing people towards public transport (where covid transmission could be more prevalent). These two ideas logically conflict in terms of the outcome wanted.

 

[Jeanette Moo]

I think thatg point is that if you are using Covdi and the resultant funding to push through something quickly and without the correct procedures and you have to ask why corners are being cut and vulnerable people are not being supported and their interests not looked after by the council.

....and my thoughts are if they have done as you suggest......what else is missed? Just how much of a post-it note job has been dropped on us.

 

[chowce5382]

....and my thoughts are if they have done as you suggest......what else is missed? Just how much of a post-it note job has been dropped on us.

I'm really like to publish the extent of the post-it notes now but can't. I hope everyone here will accept that coming on here and taking the time to try and answer questions as well as I can shows that I'm not trying the hide anything and that I'm doing this because I think that the law matters and that those in power must always adhere to it. I understand that people will say that they don't buy it. To those of you who feel that way, I'm happy to meet up in a pub and actually sit and debate this. I feel that it is intrinsic to my moral code and am more than happy to discuss it.

 

[alex_]

The roads have changed and the generally structure in terms of what is using then. They haven’t put dropped kerbs in and, possibly more importantly, haven’t put in zebra crossing for wheelchair users in the appropriate places. They haven’t even thought of doing this

and in the places concerned there was un-impeded access to the road, no parked cars or suchlike.

 

[sleaterkinney]

The decision and the ability to make it is a political one. The courts are not able to judge to political ideology. However, they can look at whether it was done lawfully. We live in a society where decisions made by the executive should be done lawfully. That is what the courts will be looking at. I think that we would all want to know whether a decision is lawful or not.

That’s fine, but do you make it clear to the people donating that you could win your case and the LTNs could still remain as they are?

 

[chowce5382]

That’s fine, but do you make it clear to the people donating that you could win your case and the LTNs could still remain as they are?

We have made that clear. We have let people know that it is within the gift of a judge

 

[sleaterkinney]

this is an interesting point.
1. as a result of covid and lockdown, people will be reluctant to use public transport.
2. there isn't enough space for those people deciding not to use public transport to drive.

council decides to reduce the number of cars on the road, therefore, pushing people towards public transport (where covid transmission could be more prevalent). These two ideas logically conflict in terms of the outcome wanted.

Not at all. The council has made it easier for other, more efficient forms of transport.

 

[chowce5382]

and in the places concerned there was un-impeded access to the road, no parked cars or suchlike.

you're focussing on one tiny part of how LTNs impact the vulnerable, whilst i understand why, it doesn't impact whether the work was done at the beginning to understand their impact. That is more of a de facto point. A council an't point to whether something just happens to be ok now and then say that they did to DD beforehand, that is just a lucky result of their actions.

 

[edcraw]

We have made that clear. We have let people know that it is within the gift of a judge

Do you mean it’s in the gift of the judge to remove LTNs? I’m not sure it is.

 

[chowce5382]

Do you mean it’s in the gift of the judge to remove LTNs? I’m not sure it is.

A judge could say that, as a result of not following the correct legal procedure to implement them, then their implementation has no legal basis and has been unlawful and then direct the council to undertake a number actions (assessment etc.) before they are allowed to implement them again.

 

[thebackrow]

The point someone else made was that stopping the spread of COVID was never the ppint of LTNs but it's all we heard when they were being put in. Now the narrative moves when such resistance is seen. That alone is the cause of much rage...the sheer cheek of it.

I agree with all the other points but what are we - coming up to a year in and still waiting for good res

If you go back and read Lambeth's original announcements there are two separate things that were announced at the same time. They are both a response to COVID but they're not both about preventing spread (although I suppose providing people with a healthy alternative to using public transport would help limit spread as well)

• Footway widening for social distancing
• LTNs for to remove rat-running traffic and boost walking and cycling

 

[chowce5382]

If you go back and read Lambeth's original announcements there are two separate things that were announced at the same time. They are both a response to COVID but they're not both about preventing spread (although I suppose providing people with a healthy alternative to using public transport would help limit spread as well)

• Footway widening for social distancing
• LTNs for to remove rat-running traffic and boost walking and cycling

Where did the funding come from and as a result of what?

 

[Torpid Scorpion]

chowce5382 Thank you for coming on here and doing this.

I heartily hope you lose your case. We have a local congestion and pollution problem and a global climate emergency. I can’t help but think your time and your £35,000 would be better spent holding the national government to account as it destroys the lives and livelihoods of millions, but of course your priorities are your own.

But I appreciate what you are doing here, the calm and polite way you’re answering these questions.

Since you seem like a reasonable person, it must be painful for you to hang out with the unpleasant denizens of the OneLambeth Facebook group, as evidenced by their posts that have been duplicated further above in the thread. I can’t imagine many of them get out of bed in the morning worried about equalities.

I do have one question… Could you give us a feeling for how much of the funds raised to date come from donors outside of the affected area, as opposed to lambeth residents? It does seem to be a significant amount based on the comments. I’m assuming these are the non-local commuters that the ltns are designed to target, as well as pressure groups like ltda prosecuting their war on cyclists. I can see why they would want to attack these measures.

 

[chowce5382]

chowce5382 Thank you for coming on here and doing this.

I heartily hope you lose your case. We have a local congestion and pollution problem and a global climate emergency. I can’t help but think your time and your £35,000 would be better spent holding the national government to account as it destroys the lives and livelihoods of millions, but of course your priorities are your own.

But I appreciate what you are doing here, the calm and polite way you’re answering these questions.

Since you seem like a reasonable person, it must be painful for you to hang out with the unpleasant denizens of the OneLambeth Facebook group, as evidenced by their posts that have been duplicated further above in the thread. I can’t imagine many of them get out of bed in the morning worried about equalities.

I do have one question… Could you give us a feeling for how much of the funds raised to date come from donors outside of the affected area, as opposed to lambeth residents? It does seem to be a significant amount based on the comments. I’m assuming these are the non-local commuters that the ltns are designed to target, as well as pressure groups like ltda prosecuting their war on cyclists. I can see why they would want to attack these measures.

Hi

my feeling is that most of the funds raised are local. It’s difficult to tell but we have seen significant funds coming through directly after different parts of the borough have been provided with leaflets and a QR code. As such it feels like there is a direct correlation between the two.

 

[sleaterkinney]

We have made that clear. We have let people know that it is within the gift of a judge

Could you show me where you say this?. I don't see it on the go fund me page.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

There’s a distinct whiff of the stuff that comes out a cows backside here

 

[chowce5382]

Could you show me where you say this?. I don't see it on the go fund me page.

I’ve said it on a number of calls we’ve had to which people can join if they want to understand the legal process further

 

[chowce5382]

There’s a distinct whiff of the stuff that comes out a cows backside here

In what respect?

 

[sleaterkinney]

I’ve said it on a number of calls we’ve had to which people can join if they want to understand the legal process further

Why don't you tell people before you take their money?

 

[nagapie]

How can people be opposed to a call for proper assessment of the implications of such a far reaching system? Anything else without proper consultation would be lambasted straight away as unacceptable. That's why there always has to be opposition, whether you find the opposition odious or not it is the system of looking at things from all sides that keeps things fair.

 

[nagapie]

And as for Lambeth saying a blue badge exemption is unworkable, people should be disgusted in that. It's not unworkable, other boroughs have done it, it's a won't not can't situation because Lambeth have no interest in spending money on accessibility. As ableist as it gets.

 

[teuchter]

I think that anyone living inside an LTN who wants it to succeed should probably write to their councillors on the blue badge issue.

 

[chowce5382]

Why don't you tell people before you take their money?

Well, we have made it clear that we are going to court. We have a court date. A judge will sit and judge the case. The judge will then write up his conclusion. This judgement written by the judge will be communicated to the parties. I’m not sure how it isn’t entirely obvious that what the judge says will be the judgement. As such it’s in his gift. I’m not sure that I follow that this isn’t clear.