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

[liquidindian]

It's the old "leafy gated communities" riff phrased a different way, I think. Again there's a study that shows this broadly isn't true but academic studies don't seem to count for much these days.

If there's ever another Open Our Roads protest in Crystal Palace, I recommend if only to hear "for the many not the few" said in the poshest accents you've ever witnessed.

 

[teuchter]

Seeing as the only people that are 'kept out' are people who are both (a) driving and (b) not heading for somewhere within the LTN it implies that the "riff raff" are people who want to drive through without getting out of their car. Which is kind of the aim.

 

[alex_]

I have answered it. They already have decades of data of what happened before LTNs were introduced and those statistics will still be compiled now as all accidents are recorded.

But with absolutely zero evidence of any rise in accidents and deaths outside LTNs - but clear evidence of a huge drop inside LTNs - I'm curious as to what grounds you can now possibly 1. oppose LTNs and 2. oppose the wider roll out of LTNs.

i think he is talking about Schrödinger's boundary road - where traffic is simultaneously gridlocked and travelling so fast that accidents are off the charts.

Alex

 

[sparkybird]

Yup, she has been getting grief/targeted.

I'm really sorry to hear that - not in any way fair or justified for anyone, whatever their views on LTNs. I hope she's OK

 

[sleaterkinney]

I agree that it is sensible to see how they alter the safety of the community inside them. The road data you’re referring to is historical and pre-dates the implementation of LTNs. I’m asking why, when the current research on LTNs is being done, why that research doesn’t extend to outside the LTNs. That is my question and I don’t understand why no one will answer it.

How can it predate the introduction of LTNs given they have been around for decades?

 

[Gramsci]

He’ll troll until he gets the reaction he wants, gets a ban and then can run back to his friends saying he’s been censored and cancelled which he’ll use to vindicate his position.

To call someone a Troll is serious allegation.

The poster ( naively imo let it be known what his real identity is) real identity is known. Not something a Troll does.

Whatever you think of his posts he's not a Troll.

 

[chowce5382]

To call someone a Troll is serious allegation.

The poster ( naively imo let it be known what his real identity is) real identity is known. Not something a Troll does.

Whatever you think of his posts he's not a Troll.

Yup, didn’t realise that it was all anon on here but was done in good faith to answer questions. Now someone on here is referring to conversations on here on his Twitter account. I thought that these conversations were supposed to stay on here.

 

[Gramsci]

Yup, didn’t realise that it was all anon on here but was done in good faith to answer questions. Now someone on here is referring to conversations on here on his Twitter account. I thought that these conversations were supposed to stay on here.

Yes they are.

As long time poster here have been finding some of the references to you under your real name distasteful.

Ive also had someone here post they had reported my twitter account. This appeared to be a misunderstanding. They were sorry they had got the wrong person. Not that they had posted here about my alleged twitter account.

However its not etiquette here to do that kind of thing.

Why I've put my account here as private now.

As it appears my real identity may be sought on this thread.

 

[cuppa tee]

How do they tick a "keeping out the riff raff" box?

wel I am just using that term as it was put that way to me, one thing about the school parents scene is that you might get access to certain social events normally not for the likes of me.... the vino is flowing and the old ’ in vino veritas’ comes into play im not saying that all supporters of traffic reduction schemes think like that but some definitely do, like the gentleman in the Cambria pub who I engaged over a impressive cheese board a few years back,..and that’s just one example,.. a mild one at that....

 

[liquidindian]

The poster ( naively imo let it be known what his real identity is) real identity is known. Not something a Troll does.

A troll posts stuff just to get a reaction. Like refusing to acknowledge that question has been answered when it very obviously has been answered, or suggesting that vandalism is an art installation.

 

[BigTom]

Over 50% of boundary roads weren’t included. 75% in some areas. I was just asking at the beginning why this is a common feature of the research into LTNs in general.

Do you know where to find the base data set for which roads to include? The journal article looked to lead to another piece of research for its data set on which roads to look at but that didn't have a list of roads. It looks like they had tried to get all the recent and still continuing London LTNs in it from the text of the journal article:

We focused on LTNs introduced between March and September 2020 and still present at the end of October 2020. Having generated datasets representing these new LTN locations and their boundary roads

(my emphasis)

 

[chowce5382]

A troll posts stuff just to get a reaction. Like refusing to acknowledge that question has been answered when it very obviously has been answered, or suggesting that vandalism is an art installation.

I don’t post thing to get a reaction. I follow up my position to the extent that we’re going to the court of appeal. Not something a Troll does. On the other hand, why are you talking about what goes on here on Twitter. I thought this was supposed to be a decent forum. I’m not sure what the rules are exactly but pretty sure that this isn’t ok for this forum.

 

[Gramsci]

A troll posts stuff just to get a reaction. Like refusing to acknowledge that question has been answered when it very obviously has been answered, or suggesting that vandalism is an art installation.

So don't react to it.

 

[liquidindian]

I don’t post thing to get a reaction. I follow up my position to the extent that we’re going to the court of appeal. Not something a Troll does. On the other hand, why are you talking about what goes on here on Twitter. I thought this was supposed to be a decent forum. I’m not sure what the rules are exactly but pretty sure that this isn’t ok for this forum.

We can discuss it over there if you want.

 

[chowce5382]

We can discuss it over there if you want.

I thought this wasn’t form on here…?

 

[snowy_again]

To call someone a Troll is serious allegation.

The poster ( naively imo let it be known what his real identity is) real identity is known. Not something a Troll does.

Whatever you think of his posts he's not a Troll.

It’s editor ‘s forum and rules - all transparently covered here:

Terms and rules and Forum Visibility & Privacy

- report my post and he can moderate it.

 

[teuchter]

There seems to be no shortage of bonkers interpretations of what that study shows. For this guy it's not just insufficient data but somehow actually demonstrates that boundary roads have become more dangerous.

 

[Gramsci]

It’s editor ‘s forum and rules - all transparently covered here:

Terms and rules and Forum Visibility & Privacy

- report my post and he can moderate it.

I was talking to you. Not the Editor.

I had no intention of reporting your post. Nor did my post imply I was going to.

I stand by my comment on your post.

 

[Gramsci]

This is a particularly nasty thread.

 

[BigTom]

This is a particularly nasty thread.

LTNs don't seem to make for happy discussion online. One of my local Facebook groups fully banned discussion of it because it caused so many arguments, very similar ones to ones on here (although there's no suggestion i know if that Birmingham city council didn't follow due process in their implementation here so we don't have arguments about that)

 

[chowce5382]

 

[BigTom]

View attachment 280436

What's that from? A link or reference or something would be helpful.
Does it have an actual list of roads included and not included?

 

[chowce5382]

View attachment 280436

There was no definition of boundary roads in Goldman’s paper so I followed the hyperlink to “equity in new active travel” which resulted in this finding

 

[teuchter]

Isn't that simply saying that they were excluding boundary roads from their definition of what's 'in' an LTN? Which is the whole point of the exercise?

 

[chowce5382]

What's that from? A link or reference or something would be helpful.
Does it have an actual list of roads included and not included?

Yup, it’s only the roads inside LTNs. Boundary roads are removed

 

[chowce5382]

Isn't that simply saying that they were excluding boundary roads from their definition of what's 'in' an LTN? Which is the whole point of the exercise?

It just backs up what I was saying yesterday which people seemed to take issue with. Just thought I’d provide some more info so that people can take stock

 

[teuchter]

It just backs up what I was saying yesterday which people seemed to take issue with.

No it doesn't.

 

[chowce5382]

No it doesn't.

I was saying that boundary roads and areas outside LTNs were generally excluded from studies. I was asking why this was. People told me it wasn’t the case so I’ve provided the above.

 

[sleaterkinney]

View attachment 280436

Well done, now what does the next sentence say?

 

[liquidindian]

I was saying that boundary roads and areas outside LTNs were generally excluded from studies.

The boundary roads are excluded from the definition of an LTN in this study because this is looking at who lives inside an LTN and comparing it to who lives outside an LTN. If the boundary roads had been included in this definition then it would not be able to do that.

It then says that they "generated a separate set of LTN boundary roads" to be part of the analysis. This doesn't say that boundary roads were excluded from the study. It says they were included in the study.