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

[Bus Stopped]

Agreed, but if I were put in charge of implementing changes which want to bring changes away from car usage and promote walking and cycling, I wouldn't do it in the last week of November.

The same bunch of self-serving idiots who are big into new cafes at the Rec, but not heating the place or maintaining any of the machines in the gym. The same idiots who have tried over many years to force people from their homes in Cressingham. The same idiots who have outsourced every single job to the extent that, instead of employing people locally, I have to write to Portsmouth if I want to discuss my council tax. The only people left getting any direct benefit from the council are the councillors themselves.

They have made a balls of LTN implementation and, even if you agree with LTN generally, as I do myself, our councillors deserve no credit, given how badly they have implemented it. We live in a rotten borough where questioning their policies are met with hostility and derision and there's nothing can be done about it.

Yes terrorising tenants with threats of demolition. Then wasting tens of millions on Homes for Lambeth because Cllr Bennett knew so much better than the riff raff.

 

[sparkybird]

Maybe, but it was introduced as a Covid emergency measure. And then, following the easing of Covid restrictions, it was not mentioned again in relation to Covid.

There are still signs in place with a covid URL Google Maps

If our council and councillors had had the strength of their convictions, they would not have introduced it as a Covid related measure.



Yes, near the high road. Stick a pin at Saint Margaret the Queen and draw a one mile radius from there. I guarantee you that the houses in the ABC roads, including Downton and Wavertree, have the highest average house price.



Indeed, but having communicated that they would not include Valleyfield, they still went and put the cameras and signs up, leading to residents' complaints and then they had to take them back down again.



It has been repeated by the council, and councillors, ad nauseam that there have been issues with the signage, that the contractor did not do their job correctly, that it needs to be revised etc. etc.



Agreed, but what we have is a valid scheme which has been implemented by buffoons, generating negative public response.

No, not 'maybe' the policy has been there since 2018. Councils' received funding from TfL to implement LTN's during Covid - good on Lambeth for getting the funds so that they could implement their policies more quickly. There are old Covid signs all over the place, not sure what your point is here.

There are many individual council/social housing properties all over the ABC roads - I'm not just talking about estates or HMO's near the high road. Sure there are million pound houses there too - that's just the way London is.

I do agree that the scheme has been poorly implemented - with mistakes and shit timing - it would have been much better to put it in during the summer. I have no idea why it was delayed. The schemes have not been helped by the constant camera and signage vandalism which the council then have to put right.

 

[sparkybird]

At this point I will raise again that disabled people attending an anti LTN demo have a valid argument. With multiple LTNs all over the borough, blue badge holders still only have access to one filter. Apparently the LTNs are to clear the roads for those that have to drive except Lambeth won't put the money up to create an accessible system. Even our excellent MP Bell Ribeiro-Addy has taken them to task on this.
The pro lobby don't seem to care because they have a very simplistic and ableist idea about barriers for the disabled.

I think this is a bit unfair to say that all those who support LTN's don't care about how disabled people get around - that's not my experience. Unfortunately it's not up to me, but personally I can't see the issue with giving BB holders more access through the filters.

 

[Smick]

No, not 'maybe' the policy has been there since 2018. Councils' received funding from TfL to implement LTN's during Covid - good on Lambeth for getting the funds so that they could implement their policies more quickly. There are old Covid signs all over the place, not sure what your point is here.

There are many individual council/social housing properties all over the ABC roads - I'm not just talking about estates or HMO's near the high road. Sure there are million pound houses there too - that's just the way London is.

I do agree that the scheme has been poorly implemented - with mistakes and shit timing - it would have been much better to put it in during the summer. I have no idea why it was delayed. The schemes have not been helped by the constant camera and signage vandalism which the council then have to put right.

My point is that, as you point out, the council has had a policy to introduce LTNs since 2018, long before anyone had heard the word "covid". When the covid emergency presented itself, Lambeth advised that it was introducing LTNs to assist with dealing with the emergency. I believe this to have been knowingly misleading because, as suggested by you, it was always their intention. However, by linking it to covid, they created an expectation that the changes would be reversed following the emergency, which they weren't.

As regards covid signs all over the place, there's nothing worse than phoning British Gas in 2024 and getting something like "in these unprecedented times, our call volumes are higher than ever". So many large organisations have taken the piss by linking changes and their shortcomings to covid. And it infuriates me when it is used as an excuse.

I think your description of poor implementation does not go far enough. It has been unprofessional and purposely misleading and, thanks to a council chamber where what limited opposition there is gets shouted down in an ad hominem attack rather than addressing points made, no learnings will be made.

A positive scheme, woefully implemented. But I have come to expect no less from our council and councillors.

 

[editor]

I think it would depend on the LTN. But any vote should give the LTN a chance to bed in.

I’ve said before I’m in favour of banning private car use in London for a government zip car scheme. But I don’t think all current car users should be condemned.

Also whether you blame car users or not the latest LTN has pushed more pollution on the high street who already suffered the worst pollution.

I live on Coldharbour Lane which has poor air quality thanks to the long lines of single occupant cars that clog up the street every day.

 

[Bus Stopped]

I live on Coldharbour Lane which has poor air quality thanks to the long lines of single occupant cars that clog up the street every day.

I think private car ownership in cities should be banned.

 

[liquidindian]

As regards covid signs all over the place, there's nothing worse than phoning British Gas in 2024 and getting something like "in these unprecedented times, our call volumes are higher than ever". So many large organisations have taken the piss by linking changes and their shortcomings to covid. And it infuriates me when it is used as an excuse.

You're not wrong, but it sounds like you're just generally angry at, you know, things.

 

[Smick]

You're not wrong, but it sounds like you're just generally angry at, you know, things.

Yes! I am! Angry is good. It gets the pulse going.

As I said before, I want to see revolution. But i won’t be manning the barricades myself, just cheering from my sofa.

With my bad hip and dislike of other people, I just sit at home and type angry stuff out which is mostly read by other people who also do fuck all.

 

[Smick]

I think private car ownership in cities should be banned.

Would it not be better restricting road usage? Otherwise people from outside the city would drive in, making those living in the city to have to suffer the effects of a problem on which they have absolutely no impact.

 

[nagapie]

I think this is a bit unfair to say that all those who support LTN's don't care about how disabled people get around - that's not my experience. Unfortunately it's not up to me, but personally I can't see the issue with giving BB holders more access through the filters.

Would you be in favour of a scheme that limited access for another minority group?

In my experience most pro people fall into three camps: those who actually don't realise blue badge holders aren't allowed through as they think the single filter access applies to all filters, those that defend them despite the fact that they are making access to the community harder when it already is very hard and those that are totally ignorant about disability and say what's the problem, disabled people can still drive on the main roads with everyone else.

 

[edcraw]

I think private car ownership in cities should be banned.

Okay but can we have restrictions such as LTNs until that happens?

 

[Bus Stopped]

Would it not be better restricting road usage? Otherwise people from outside the city would drive in, making those living in the city to have to suffer the effects of a problem on which they have absolutely no impact.

I think it should be replaced with a state owned zip car so people could still drive.

Not sure that is practical in the countryside though.

 

[Bus Stopped]

Okay but can we have restrictions such as LTNs until that happens?

Yes. But make sure they work properly and it would help if they weren’t implemented by arrogant anti working class councillors.

 

[sparkybird]

Would you be in favour of a scheme that limited access for another minority group?

In my experience most pro people fall into three camps: those who actually don't realise blue badge holders aren't allowed through as they think the single filter access applies to all filters, those that defend them despite the fact that they are making access to the community harder when it already is very hard and those that are totally ignorant about disability and say what's the problem, disabled people can still drive on the main roads with everyone else.

I'm not sure what you mean by another minority group?

I am in the forth camp then - I agree that the council should make life easier for disabled people who drive and open up the filters to them - not just one filter. And for disabled people who don't drive, reducing cars driven by the able bodied in their neighbourhoods, makes the roads/pavements safer for them

 

[edcraw]

Yes. But make sure they work properly and it would help if they weren’t implemented by arrogant anti working class councillors.

Well we’re on the same page then. No need for a vote either.

 

[sparkybird]

However, by linking it to covid, they created an expectation that the changes would be reversed following the emergency, which they weren't.

This is your assumption, but I never saw anything from the Council to say that the schemes were temporary and would be removed. Indeed it would be odd to do so, given it was a long standing policy to implement them

But it's OK to disagree!

 

[Bus Stopped]

Well we’re on the same page then. No need for a vote either.

Pah have a good weekend.

I can also report my bus journey home today was very good.

 

[nagapie]

I'm not sure what you mean by another minority group?

I am in the forth camp then - I agree that the council should make life easier for disabled people who drive and open up the filters to them - not just one filter. And for disabled people who don't drive, reducing cars driven by the able bodied in their neighbourhoods, makes the roads/pavements safer for them

Not sure what you don't understand.

You're in the 2nd camp, you support the scheme despite the fact that it reduces access for disabled people and makes life in the borough harder for them and their families. Preferring that it was more fair for the disabled makes no difference, it isn't.

 

[edcraw]

Pah have a good weekend.

I can also report my bus journey home today was very good.

You’re only saying that to discredit the anti-LTN lot again!

 

[teuchter]

The Covid thing was linked to funding suddenly being made available by central govt wasn't it? So councils took the opportunity while it was there. And now we have a central government firmly on the side of the private motorists maybe it's just as well they did.

 

[edcraw]

The Covid thing was linked to funding suddenly being made available by central govt wasn't it? So councils took the opportunity while it was there. And now we have a central government firmly on the side of the private motorists maybe it's just as well they did.

Yes - think people should be grateful that their council tax wasn’t wasted on these waste of money money making schemes!!

 

[BusLanes]

I take your point but it’s now a legal requirement that estate regeneration gets a vote. Surely that’s a good thing? If that had always be the case it might have stopped developers fleecing the public purse like in elephant and castle and communities being demolished.

Given LTNs require consultation by law why not have a vote?

Right but as said that's a narrow constituency. It's also an electoral process that has been challenged a fair bit.

Getting people to vote is pretty hard in this country and whilst I generally think local referendums probably are more appropriate than constitutional referendums, I'd reckon we'd end up up with under 20% turnout unless there was a huge effort.

 

[BusLanes]

The main issue with Lambeth at present for this kind of thing is that Labour is too popular in Inner London, in part due to local and national factors.

So they get enough of a vote where they could win every councillor W/o any real effort.

 

[edcraw]

Right but as said that's a narrow constituency. It's also an electoral process that has been challenged a fair bit.

Getting people to vote is pretty hard in this country and whilst I generally think local referendums probably are more appropriate than constitutional referendums, I'd reckon we'd end up up with under 20% turnout unless there was a huge effort.

75% minimum turnout and if not the LTN stays?

 

[thebackrow]

I agree about the campaigners. But the latest LTN has clearly a lot of bad feeling from local residents. Those who get the code should get a vote.

the position of the people speaking at the demo and leading the anti campaign seems to be that every LTN in the Uk implemented since 2020 (but weirdly not any that are older) is a complete disaster and must be removed.

that blanket opposition also works against anyone trying to raise any genuine issues.

 

[thebackrow]

I think this is a bit unfair to say that all those who support LTN's don't care about how disabled people get around - that's not my experience. Unfortunately it's not up to me, but personally I can't see the issue with giving BB holders more access through the filters.

this still doesn’t have to be a question of more cars. if the objective is increased mobility for people who are physically disabled and do need motorised transport for short trips, we should still be looking at smaller, lighter, slower alternatives to full size cars capable of motorway speeds.

 

[thebackrow]

Would you be in favour of a scheme that limited access for another minority group?.

isn’t part of the point that high traffic Neighbourhoods, which is the previous default position, effectively limited access for those groups that can’t or don’t drive - whether due to young or old age, not being wealthy enough to own a car, or any of the wide range of disabilities that prevent them from driving.

and access isn’t limited - all streets and homes are still accessible by car

 

[nagapie]

isn’t part of the point that high traffic Neighbourhoods, which is the previous default position, effectively limited access for those groups that can’t or don’t drive - whether due to young or old age, not being wealthy enough to own a car, or any of the wide range of disabilities that prevent them from driving.

You're pitting the disabled against each other, it's bullshit. Those that need to drive due to their disabilities are not hindering other disabled people nor preventing the clearing of the roads of those that don't need to drive.
Ableist drivel again.

 

[thebackrow]

Deleted

 

[thebackrow]

You're pitting the disabled against each other, it's bullshit. Those that need to drive due to their disabilities are not hindering other disabled people nor preventing the clearing of the roads of those that don't need to drive.
Ableist drivel again.

insults rather than engagement again.

this still doesn’t have to be a question of more cars. if the objective is increased mobility for people who are physically disabled and do need motorised transport for short trips, we should still be looking at smaller, lighter, slower alternatives to full size cars capable of motorway speeds.