Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

What an awful account this is. These people are just going to carry on spewing bile - how would shit like this every help their ‘cause’. They really are clueless.


I wondered what Transport for All had to say on this issue (as a Brixton based organisation).
Their website is quite flashy - but their address is given as "336 Brixton Rd, Ferndale, London SW9 7AA" which seemed a bit old fashioned - considering they are now bang in the middle of Brixton North Ward and Ferdale has been abolished for some time.

Transport for All do mention LTNs,, here: Pave The Way » Transport for All
There is quite long report
and the conclusions (as summed up in the report) are:
"It is clear from our findings that, although some disabled people are experiencing benefits as a result of LTNs, many disabled people are being disproportionally and negatively impacted, compounded by the many existing barriers that disabled people face in many aspects of their lives. In addition, disabled people are often prevented from accessing the Active Travel measures that LTNs are meant to encourage, meaning they have no option but to drive and are then penalised for doing so.
LTNs, in their current format, are too much ‘stick’ and not enough ‘carrot’: they bring negative impacts for those who continue to use cars, and too few incentives or changes that increase disabled people’s opportunities to access Active Travel. The lack of consultation and meaningful engagement with disabled residents has created a toxic and divided atmosphere where disabled people feel ignored and demonised.
However, some disabled people do benefit greatly from these schemes, and the aims of reducing pollution, reducing traffic, and reducing road danger are important to disabled people. We don’t believe ripping them out and returning to normal is the way forward. Indeed, the ‘normal’ we had before was not accessible enough either. Instead, what we need is a series of short-term measures to address and mitigate the negative impacts arising from LTNs. This needs to happen alongside some wide-reaching long-term solutions - to address the many barriers that disabled people face to Active Travel and to encourage take up of walking, wheeling and cycling, and to create an accessible public transport system as a viable alternative to car-use. Local authorities and transport bodies alike must demonstrate that co-production with disabled people is at the heart of all consultations and policy-making."

This work was done during Covid - which possibly made it more of an issue. But then without Covid we wouldn't have LTNs would we?
 
Lets go round again.
I wondered what Transport for All had to say on this issue (as a Brixton based organisation).
January 2021

But then without Covid we wouldn't have LTNs would we?
May 2019
 
Lets go round again.

January 2021


May 2019
Of course - I should have been reading on 21st January 2021. No harm done I hope.
 
But then without Covid we wouldn't have LTNs would we?
No, LTNs have been in Lambeths transport strategy since at least 2019. The first two to be introduced outside of COVID emergency measures (Brixton Hill and Streatham Wells) are to be trialed before the end of the financial year (March 2023)
 
No, LTNs have been in Lambeths transport strategy since at least 2019. The first two to be introduced outside of COVID emergency measures (Brixton Hill and Streatham Wells) are to be trialed before the end of the financial year (March 2023)
I think CH1 knows that but seems to be a usual anti argument - “now covid is over (?!) no need for LTNs anymore” 🥱
 
Been sent this

And this is unforgiveable

LTN’S CREATE DEAD ZONES - ENDANGERING WOMEN

Women are disproportionately affected by crime E.g. Sarah Everard - Sarah Everard: How a woman's death sparked a nation's soul-searching
 
Been sent this

And this is unforgiveable
Really unhinged - group behind it seems to be in Streatham and started a fundraiser to stop a monstrous 3 storey development that would imprison then in their homes. Nutters.

 
Been sent this

And this is unforgivable
I don't really rate their chances - this approach has already failed - One of the OneLambeth's became Lambeth Referendum and despite flying in the street and coverage and pushing it for well over a year (?) never got beyond 1100 of the 12000 signatures they said they needed (and this petition thinks they need 17000 signatures). And even if it somehow succeeded it's a big reach to think that the council would then go against their published, consulted on, strategy and plans to rip out LTNs.

Lambeth Referendum looks to replace Lambeth’s cabinet system with a more open, democratic and accountable committee system
 
Also it’s classic onelambeth simplistic bullshit.

“A local council must hold a referendum on whether the council should change to a different form of governance if at least 5 per cent of the local government electors in that area petition the local council to do so.”

So if they get to the 5%, Lambeth then have to hold a referendum on LTNs.

I don’t think these people are very clever.
 
Also it’s classic onelambeth simplistic bullshit.

“A local council must hold a referendum on whether the council should change to a different form of governance if at least 5 per cent of the local government electors in that area petition the local council to do so.”

So if they get to the 5%, Lambeth then have to hold a referendum on LTNs.

I don’t think these people are very clever.
Not my words but "It's the deadly combination of dishonesty and stupidity that makes them such brilliantly ineffective campaigners"
 
Great start.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_2022-11-21-00-20-54-95_3aea4af51f236e4932235fdada7d1643~2.jpg
    Screenshot_2022-11-21-00-20-54-95_3aea4af51f236e4932235fdada7d1643~2.jpg
    100.8 KB · Views: 31
  • Screenshot_2022-11-21-00-20-41-16_3aea4af51f236e4932235fdada7d1643~2.jpg
    Screenshot_2022-11-21-00-20-41-16_3aea4af51f236e4932235fdada7d1643~2.jpg
    35.9 KB · Views: 31
Good article in the Guardian today about the anti-LTN, anti-cycling lobby’s latest distortions of fact.

A time reminder that recent improvements must be constantly defended!

Nothing about disability though. Guess that's because neighbouring Southwark and other LAs have given blue badge holders unlimited access.
It shouldn't surprise me, I work in Lambeth and am often shocked at the lack of understanding of disability, very much a blind spot.
 
ULEZ to be expanded across the whole of greater London in August.
Weirdly the Guardian article did not provide any stats about the success of ULEZ on pollution in central London.

Where is the best source for tracking air quality in Brixton?
 
ULEZ to be expanded across the whole of greater London in August.
Weirdly the Guardian article did not provide any stats about the success of ULEZ on pollution in central London.

Where is the best source for tracking air quality in Brixton?
Because it was announced so far in advance most of the impact of ULEZ happened before it went live.
Some info here from a month after the expansion to the south circular -
In the first month of operation the vehicle compliance rate with the ULEZ standards was around 92 per cent.
Compared to compliance levels of 39 per cent in 2017, the percentage of vehicles now meeting the required standard has more than doubled.
On average there were around 47,000 fewer older, more polluting vehicles seen each day in the zone compared to the two weeks before the scheme was introduced, a reduction of 37 per cent. There were also 11,000 fewer vehicles driving at all, each day. As a result of these changes, we estimate there will be a 5 per cent reduction in CO2 emissions from cars and vans in the newly expanded zone in its first year. This is on top of the 6 percent reduction in CO2 emissions in the central London ULEZ area since 2019.
Compliance with the ULEZ standards in the rest of London outside the zone has reached 82 per cent, an increase of 2 percentage points since the scheme went live in October, demonstrating the wider benefits of the scheme. This compares to compliance levels of 39 per cent in February 2017, an increase of 43 percent since the ULEZ was announced.
But of course it's pretty difficult to create a counter-factual to compare to what the 'fleet' of vehicles driving in London would look like if ULEZ had never even been proposed as theres a natural replacement cycle for vehicles. And air quality/pollution depends on many other factors (notably the weather) so short term or even year to year comparisons are somewhat unreliable.
London’s ULEZ reduced the city’s nitrogen dioxide levels by a few per cent during the first few weeks of its implementation.
This is according to a study by Imperial College London researchers who say their findings highlight that ULEZs are not a silver bullet and that sustained improvements in air pollution require multiple measures.
 
Disappointingly Heart Streatham magazine has come out vehemently against the proposed Streatham Wells LTN.

One of the reasons they give is supposed poor public transport. There’s at least 2 and arguably 4 train stations in walking distance and several bus routes.

Also low car ownership in most of the area.

Wish people were more honest with their reasons for opposing.
 
Disappointingly Heart Streatham magazine has come out vehemently against the proposed Streatham Wells LTN.

One of the reasons they give is supposed poor public transport. There’s at least 2 and arguably 4 train stations in walking distance and several bus routes.

Also low car ownership in most of the area.

Wish people were more honest with their reasons for opposing.
It's better than that. Heart Streatham are protesting there has been 'no engagement' - only to be reminded by the local councillor that they'd carried an advert about the scheme in their publication!

 
It's better than that. Heart Streatham are protesting there has been 'no engagement' - only to be reminded by the local councillor that they'd carried an advert about the scheme in their publication!



Not that type of consultation !

This is a great example
of the disingenuousness of the antis.
 
It's better than that. Heart Streatham are protesting there has been 'no engagement' - only to be reminded by the local councillor that they'd carried an advert about the scheme in their publication!


Think so many equate consultation/being listened to with just getting their own way so there will never be enough.
 
It's better than that. Heart Streatham are protesting there has been 'no engagement' - only to be reminded by the local councillor that they'd carried an advert about the scheme in their publication!


They also seem to have written about it in that issue 🙄
 

Attachments

  • 2F8AB47C-EC30-4E53-9EDA-A77E69B62F58.jpeg
    2F8AB47C-EC30-4E53-9EDA-A77E69B62F58.jpeg
    109.5 KB · Views: 18
Back
Top Bottom