sleaterkinney
Well-Known Member
The opposite!. Cleaner air = rampant capitalism.
Brixton Liveable Neighbourhood and LTN schemes - improvements for pedestrians and cyclists
- Thread starter teuchter
- Start date
newbie
undisambiguated
this is the point I've been making, over and over again. You, other campaigners, Lambeth have developed these plans without incorporating any workable ideas for ensuring equity. If the amount of denial on this thread is widespread it's not even been thought about. What might be called social justice should be central. Instead it's not even peripheral, it's lacking altogether.
My objection is as above, that the exact opposite of social justice is baked in, is an intrinsic part of these LTN schemes, widening social division, marginalisation, alienation and so on.
I remember the thread even if your link doesn't work, but I don't accept that basic premise, Brixton isn't crap. Policy stemming from an approach which prioritises the affluent inevitably further disadvantages those already less well off.
If you mean there are arguments in favour of gentrification as a process, why not say so openly and honestly.
There is such a proposal right here, of exactly that.
I asked above, on this page for an "explanation of why nice, apparently prosperous Victorian streets are the most deserving parts of the borough to be improved." You haven't even attempted to answer it.
Yeah, yeah. That lovely video above of delightful children being taught to cycle in the middle of leafy Dulwich roads creates such a warm rosy glow. No such video for the kids who live or go to school on the arteries because they're just collateral.
Why do you keep doing this? I've not said 'purely' you've made it up. I've said, over and again, that material gains from these schemes accrue to insider property owners but environmental gains- peace and quiet, pollution and so on, are more general. They are not, however, universal because displaced traffic will create an additional burden of noise, pollution and danger on those who live, work or are active on the main arteries, will increase congestion and slow down journeys and will reduce transport network resilience. These are design objectives, not by-products because the most acclaimed widespread benefit, reduction in the overall quantity of motor journeys is to be accomplished by explicitly frustrating people out of their cars. I've said all this many times.
And again, that's not even remotely accurate, you've made it up. It's not me putting forward the idea that car driving outsiders aren't welcome. I've said, quite clearly, that drivers will be "allowed in briefly and then expected to quickly sod off back out the way they came in", which is accurate, there will be no through routes for motor traffic. Meanwhile your fellow campaigner saw fit to post this, on this page and after all the back and forth, as a rather revealing indicator.
It's quite clear what the big picture longterm agenda is, despite all the denials.
That's made up too.
thebackrow
Considerably more Brixton.
I don't know - Baylis Road - kids, BAME rider (was on Lambeth Cyclists page recently). I'm sure you'll just assume it was staged but I was riding at Vauxhall this morning and was passed by a woman riding her kids on a cargo bike so not just leafy backstreets in Dulwich
Jeremy Corbyn: Safe cycling infrastructure "a matter of social justice"
Pedalling politician was speaking to local cycling campaigners in Islington
He said: “In the most deprived wards [of the borough], such as Finsbury Park, up to 73 per cent of households do not have access to a car.
“It’s a matter of social justice to provide safe, healthy routes for those on foot and bicycle.“By creating high quality, low-trafficked routes, we can ensure that the health benefits of active travel are extended to all residents, not just those currently bold enough to ride amongst traffic.” He said that measures needed to be taken to address the issue of rat-running motorists, "
Socialist enough for you?
newbie
undisambiguated
No, I'm sure the photo is real. It's missing the point I was making, but still...
As for Corbyn, so what?
Anyway, I've read the sneers and the points made to Gramsci about how pointless all this charade is, so I'm going to withdraw and we'll what happens in the real world. I doubt this over, but time will tell.
As for Corbyn, so what?
Anyway, I've read the sneers and the points made to Gramsci about how pointless all this charade is, so I'm going to withdraw and we'll what happens in the real world. I doubt this over, but time will tell.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
I've not got time to try and answer this all at the moment. I think it's pretty much all been answered already though, and we're just going round in circles.
By the way, I've had no part in "developing" these plans, I've had no involvement in the consultation for them and I've not a member of any formal campaigning group that's had anything to do with them. I'm not a cycling commuter, and normally I hardly cycle in London. I've lived in the general Brixton area for most of my adult life, but do not live inside any of the currently proposed zones. I live on a road that is busier than Railton Rd or Shakespeare Rd, one that is very unlikely ever to be inside one of these zones, and one that arguably could carry displaced traffic as a result of the Railton/Shakespeare Rd plans. I say all this just in case anyone reading might misinterpret some things you might have accidentally implied in your comments.
newbie
undisambiguated
Fair enough, let's see where the dust settles.
Rushy
basically a scrotum
I think it's now at the stage where a bunch of hyper-polarised "outsiders" who were originally arguing that consultation of local residents should reasonably be avoided until later because it might delay implementation of the Grand Scheme are still pilling in on top of eachother to silence local critique of aspects of the scheme even after it has been well and truly implemented.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
When the leading officer of the Liveable Neighbourhood scheme attended a local meeting at LJ he said ( and this is pre pandemic) that the the scheme would not go ahead if public support was lacking.
So the first round of consultation was to see if support was there.
He said to get the next part of the money from TFL the Council had to prove local support was there.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Im not clear why you have made this statement.
What point are you making? Are you referring to certain posters on this thread?
Can you clarify please.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
When I attend Council consultations now I ask for Council to make clear what has been decided by Council and what is up for discussion.
They hate being asked this.
Im actually not trying to have a go at the Council. I just think they should be straightforward and transparent on what say those who contribute to consultations have.
What one gets is powerpoint presentations and guided table "discussions".
snowy_again
Slush
.
Last edited:
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Amended as Snowy deleted post Ive deleted this quote.
The reason the discussion here appears parochial is because the Council has framed this Liveable Neighbourhood idea in that way. Splitting up the designated area into different LTNs. So its hardly surprising if discussion becomes parochial. That is how the Council are pursuing this.
If this is top down decision then the Council should say so.
I said in post above (882) I think the Council should be straightforward and transparent on what say those who contribute to consultations have.
So if its as you say above then the Council should just tell people this is how its going to be.
The government is getting local Councils to do this. So its going to be local Councils who get the flack from pissed off residents.
I think they are doing Railton first as it links into central Brixton. I still think the BID plan - amended - is under discusssion with Council. I was in Soho earlier and the business have the whole streets for tables and chairs. Its doable and cheap to do.
Im not at all happy with the way all this is undermining local democracy. People are cynical enough about politicians already without Covid being used as excuse by politicians to push through there schemes without debate. I can see it happening and I dont like it.
The next in line for this government imo is weakening planning. On excuse that we must build to get economy going. Brixton BID proposal is let business have what they want and get rid of the red tape. They are quite open about this. It all fits in with this governments right wing agenda for post Brexit Britain.
All of this starts to add up to undermining gradually of local democracy. Its not gentrification its local democracy that is my main concern in this instance. Local democracy is far from perfect but it should be defended and deepened. People have little say over there lives so the little they have in local democracy should not be hollowed out.
The Labour Cllrs have sense of entitlement born of years in power. This pandemic is giving them more power to do what they want in some areas. Without having to deal with people like me.
I agree the pandemic is only the start of this.
The reason the discussion here appears parochial is because the Council has framed this Liveable Neighbourhood idea in that way. Splitting up the designated area into different LTNs. So its hardly surprising if discussion becomes parochial. That is how the Council are pursuing this.
If this is top down decision then the Council should say so.
I said in post above (882) I think the Council should be straightforward and transparent on what say those who contribute to consultations have.
So if its as you say above then the Council should just tell people this is how its going to be.
The government is getting local Councils to do this. So its going to be local Councils who get the flack from pissed off residents.
I think they are doing Railton first as it links into central Brixton. I still think the BID plan - amended - is under discusssion with Council. I was in Soho earlier and the business have the whole streets for tables and chairs. Its doable and cheap to do.
Im not at all happy with the way all this is undermining local democracy. People are cynical enough about politicians already without Covid being used as excuse by politicians to push through there schemes without debate. I can see it happening and I dont like it.
The next in line for this government imo is weakening planning. On excuse that we must build to get economy going. Brixton BID proposal is let business have what they want and get rid of the red tape. They are quite open about this. It all fits in with this governments right wing agenda for post Brexit Britain.
All of this starts to add up to undermining gradually of local democracy. Its not gentrification its local democracy that is my main concern in this instance. Local democracy is far from perfect but it should be defended and deepened. People have little say over there lives so the little they have in local democracy should not be hollowed out.
The Labour Cllrs have sense of entitlement born of years in power. This pandemic is giving them more power to do what they want in some areas. Without having to deal with people like me.
I agree the pandemic is only the start of this.
Last edited:
newbie
undisambiguated
As quoted that's probably the best post on the thread, I've no idea why you've withdrawn it. It's certainly the most thought provoking.
I haven't flounced, just got bored with me and a couple of others going round and round repeating ourselves. And, let's face it, you've had plenty of time to ask me questions, although quite why everyone is so keen on my proposals when all I've been seeking to do is scrutinise what's actually being implemented is a bit beyond me. I said, when I was first asked, that my personal inclination is not blue sky thinking. The argument it's this or nothing is flawed, as is it's up to you to come up with something better or you can't criticise.
Since you asked....
As - in order of use- cyclist, pedestrian, car driver/passenger, bus passenger I think 20mph is much better than before. To my mind it's made a much more dramatic difference than was portrayed upthread. It's taken a while to settle in but now the biggest problem with it, for me and I suspect others, is crossing borough boundaries and having to readjust to local expectations. I'm not aware of any research showing an effect on the main indicators of gentrification, house prices, rents etc and I haven't really viewed it in those terms. I'm happy to be better educated if there is such an argument.
However, it's broken down somewhat since everything changed during lockdown. People accelerate into empty space, which is scarier than when they're pootling along. Note I said 'people' not 'drivers'. Rye Lane in Peckham has been closed to through traffic, so delivery vans now carve out space by accelerating and scattering pedestrians. So too do cyclists and electric scooters, but they're silent, they weave mercilessly, many don't take prisoners and coming from behind they are really quite alarming. You can see pedestrians looking around nervously, not sure where the next
A London wide active travel strategy makes sense to me. I'll have to believe that LTNs are the best way to achieve that. That said, TfL obviously have a far better appreciation of transport network resilience than I have, I only know my local streets and how they work, and what happens when collisions, water mains, cranes etc block arteries or junctions.. If they say that London wide resilience should be reduced to prioritise the other benefits I can't argue, but that has not been explicitly said about the local schemes and frankly, my oft expressed doubts have been met with sfa in the way of counter arguments other than 'my street...'.
Lambeth's response is being implemented to prioritise and reward the property owners of prosperous Victorian streets, and well yes, I have reservations. I'm nothing like as well read as you, I've no idea of the London-wide criteria used by councils to determine priority neighbourhoods, either before or since the virus. There are plenty of Zone 3+ 'rat runs' through far less salubrious areas where kids could play, cycle to school and so on, where people want to breathe fresher air, enjoy peace and quiet, where the NHS is just as burdened by obesity and so on for all the claimed benefits. Exactly the same parochial arguments about gentrification might apply, or they might not and 'regeneration' might be a better term. I may or may not understand properly transparent area selection documentation but I'd certainly be reassured if I thought it existed and was based with social equity at it's heart.
I'm afraid I know nothing about Tory boroughs being against LTNs. I presume they're appealing to their voter base just as Lambeth Labour appear to be seeking to enhance their vote at the expense of the Greens.
I don't know how to manage this (or indeed anything), better or otherwise, and I've never wanted to. I don't think it's a reasonable question. If I thought I had answers I too could campaign, write a manifesto, become a councillor, aspire to world domination. As it is I write rather pointless posts on a local discussion board for my own amusement.
And yes, they're parochial posts, why not? Closing St Matthews Road and Shakespeare Rd affects me, both positively, as cyclist & pedestrian and negatively. The most recent time I drove I had to use CHL in place of SR and get there on Brixton Hill instead of SMR and yes, I resented it. Next time, with Atlantic closed (and continuing no right turn into CHL?), it'll be more frustrating. If the proposed LTNs are all implemented the physical geography of where I live will change dramatically, for both better and worse. And with it the social geography. And let's face it, the points I've been making, allbeit repetitively, haven't been put in any of the one-sided campaigning, the shoddy consultation or in many other posts. It's clear some people find any mention of gentrification or equity dull and inappropriate, but that's a shameful problem of both modern Brixton and this forum. Scrutiny of the social processes involved seems important to me, foolish though that may be.
* more specifically a young(ish) men problem, but that's a different thread.
thebackrow
Considerably more Brixton.
I did mean to acknowledge this before. I can't find the data on a quick search but, from memory, the review about a year after 20mph went in showed a c1mph average reduction across all roads and, again IIRC commented that this was consistent with what was expected and had been seen elsewhere.
My anecdotal impression is that like you, I think speeds have dropped a bit more generally since then, probably helped by pretty much all of London apart from Westminster and K&C is now 20mph (so not much adjustment to do crossing borough Boundaries any more). All of TfL's roads in the congestion zone are now 20mph as well I think and they're working their way out. Green is 20. Blue 20. map form london-digital-speed-limit-map.pdf
Should get better again when the buses get speed limiters.
Streetspace funding and guidance
Boroughs can apply for funds to carry out work under the Streetspace for London programme
tfl.gov.uk
teuchter
je suis teuchter
I don't feel that average speed is a great measure when you're considering safety. A road with an average speed of 25, and 99% of vehicles going at less than 30, is safer to my mind than one with an average speed of 22, but 10% of vehicles going over 40. I've done quite a few speedwatch sessions and pre pandemic, the picture was much more like the latter.
Just make 20mph speed limiters mandatory on all vehicles in london. Put a 5 or 10mph limit, enforced by limiters, on all roads except those designated as through routes, and maybe livable neighbourhood schemes would no longer be necessary.
Just make 20mph speed limiters mandatory on all vehicles in london. Put a 5 or 10mph limit, enforced by limiters, on all roads except those designated as through routes, and maybe livable neighbourhood schemes would no longer be necessary.
newbie
undisambiguated
I agree, and that's my point about accelerating into space, it's what some people do, but no-one gets up to 40 if there's something in the way. Lockdown created new space, so peak speeds certainly went right up and average seemed to as well. I think it's calmed down a lot since other traffic has started to get in the way again.
That's not an argument in favour of congestion everywhere to keep speeds down, it's identifying what actually happens. TfL has a lot of experience in micro-managing stretches where higher proportions of traffic routinely break speed limits, with cameras, chicanes, humps and so on. Obviously they haven't done everywhere, as it's changing and evolving. Everyone can come up with bad examples from personal observation in the long- or short-term.
Makes me wonder whether the straight and now relatively clear stretches of Shakespeare and Railton will see higher average/peak speeds than before lockdown, and Dulwich Rd lower? Otherway round perhaps, no effect, I don't know. Is anyone likely to measure this?
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Even if congestion manages to reduce speeds - usually it's only for certain portions of the day. Especially at night, otherwise congested roads are often relatively empty, so you see speeding during those times. Maybe there will periods of the day where Railton Rd sees some higher speeds than Dulwich Rd does, but if so I'd expect them to be quite limited.
But there's also the psychology thing where people are more likely to drive dangerously in areas which aren't also their home & immediate neighbourhood. I think that's part of the idea of LNs - by definition most of the traffic within them will be to or from local destinations.
But there's also the psychology thing where people are more likely to drive dangerously in areas which aren't also their home & immediate neighbourhood. I think that's part of the idea of LNs - by definition most of the traffic within them will be to or from local destinations.
newbie
undisambiguated
I hope only desirable expected consequences come out of this. I also hope the actual outcomes are measured and compared with pre-lockdown to get an objective view of whether eg skip lorries to/from LJ shave a few seconds off their journey by going just a couple mph faster because they can?
I get the localism psychology, insiders might respect their postcode peergroup even if they behave differently where they're an outsider, ie everywhere else on the planet. Not sure it's what I'd choose to promote.
editor
hiraethified
Work on the Ferndale scheme starts on Saturday
www.brixtonbuzz.com
Work begins on the Ferndale Low Traffic Neighbourhood in Brixton and Clapham this Saturday, 18th July 2020
Lambeth Council has announced that it will be starting work on Ferndale Low Traffic Neighbourhood – its third such scheme – this Saturday, 18th July, 2020.
www.brixtonbuzz.com
teuchter
je suis teuchter
At the weekend I did a trip along Railton Rd on two wheels. It was pretty quiet. One car went through the gates at the bottom end at great speed but then had to follow the 322 so didn't get to the ones at the other end any faster than me. And then a range rover also went through the gates and did an aggressive overtake on me. I guess people know that they are not going to get fined yet, or something?
wurlycurly
diss member
I'm forever turning the road signs on the lampposts round to face the right direction, the hand-made ones telling motorists they face a £130 fine. Presumably pro-car nutters are stopping to twist them round, a bit like with the Detour signs in old Roadrunner cartoons. I think the signs could do with some clarification that residents are allowed through. I've seen lots and lots of drivers stopping for a ponder and then deciding to go for it when another car drives through. I've had to explain the scheme to several confused drivers, none of whom - to their credit - morphed into Mr Angry. I love the LTN so far. Can't quite get my head around the fact that Lambeth have done something I agree with.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
I think this happens with a lot of these schemes.
It's very common to see cycle route signs turned around too.
There's a no HGVs sign on a road near me that always seems to be turned around.
Someone needs to invent a sign attachment that can't be rotated. Can't be that difficult surely...
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Residents aren't allowed to drive through the filters.
wurlycurly
diss member
I'm confused. Aren't residents allowed to drive to their home if they leave the same way they came in?
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Everyone can get to and from their home via routes that don't involve going through the filters.
Only buses and emergency vehicles can go through the filters. And of course pedestrians and bicycles.
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
Square posts
Signfix channel is what most local authorities use on their sign plates - but they generally fit cheap torquebands that are cut to length on site rather than the proper anti rotational clips - which are pricier and come in fixed sizes.
I promise I only know this from professional experience - rather than being unutterably geeky on such matters. Honest.
Similar threads
