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

[edcraw]

I’m not really sure why people are being pedantic about blue badge holders. Surely you could have a system where blue badge holders can just go through the filters, it would add very little traffic.

In terms of a vote if you need a certain percentage then why not apply that to local elections too? Indeed very little people would be voting at local elections on the basis that LTNs are more important than all other issues so the idea that local elections are a mandate is very tenuous. Or are local and national elections too complex in terms of the issues so ban them too?

What happens if you don’t get enough turnout in the local elections though?

 

[alex_]

Yes.
Doesn't change my local situation where there are many LTNs and the only available route is the main road, even if it's backed up.
And the same would apply to other places too. Often the only alternatives are less trafficed but longer.
Just give blue badge holders access, no one is hurt but lives are made easier.

If the sat nav’s won’t route them though LTNs how would most drivers ( the majority of whom use satnavs ) find the LTN cut throughs ?

Other than the ones they know, which will mostly be local - they won’t.

Alex

 

[teuchter]

I don't understand your point. Do you mean driving is not an option why?
If due to their disability, then others like family will be driving.

I mean that there are lots of people who are disabled and who don't have the option of using a car. And don't necessarily have the option of others driving for them, or prefer to live as independently as possible so only ask others to drive for them occasionally. Many of these people may have limited mobility, maybe they can walk a short distance only, maybe they use a mobility scooter. They might use public transport. They might be able to do shopping themselves as long as they can use a trolley and their route to the shop has dropped kerbs, or they walk quite slowly and can only cross roads where there is a signalled crossing. Of course, many elderly people fall into this kind of category.

And all of these people can potentially benefit massively from measures that reduce traffic and improve things for pedestrians.

Well, I expect you agree with and know all this and will say fine, of course, but how does any of this justify limiting which filters a blue badge holder can access because giving blue badge holders blanket access is really just a very small number, not large enough to significantly compromise the benefits that can be brought about by an LTN. My answer is I don't know - you may well be right but I also wonder whether this has been looked at and decided that in fact it would add significant numbers, especially if, as Lambeth has decided to do, you allow access for the badge holder plus someone else.

I think saying something like this before got me accused of ableism but I would say that if someone who has a disability but can drive, has a few minutes added to their journey, as a result of measures that can make life easier for people who have a disability but can't drive, then that's potentially ok or even a good thing.

When you say something like:

There should be a London wide exemption on blue badges, like with the congestion charge, so that London is an easier and more welcoming place for disabled people or as Lambeth themselves term those that 'have' to drive. Disabled people don't want to have to drive, they would give up their cars tomorrow for the good health and mobility that many take for granted.

It makes it seem like making London more welcome for disabled people = making things as easy as possible for those who have a disability and drive but that's not the case, there are huge numbers of people who have a disability and can't drive. There are judgements that have to be made that try and balance the interests of people in many different situations.

But anyway, the point is, I don't necessarily disagree with the idea of a blanket exemption for all blue badge holders but I can see there might be valid arguments against it and those arguments may be made with the interests of other groups of disabled people in mind. This is why I wish Lambeth would be explicit in their reasoning, when they decide on the one filter policy.

 

[sparkybird]

My point is that

Using car ownership as a proxy for LTN support, which you have done, your figures then show an even split in the residents. The vote will go one way or the other, dependent on turnout, half the residents will be pissed off, and we will see more demonstrations.

My point is that putting the LTN, and most decisions which elected officials should make, to a vote is a bad idea and should not be done.

Our politicians put themselves forward for election to make decisions. They don’t need to return to the electorate at every opportunity.

Whoa there cowboy! I've never said that car ownership is a proxy for LTN support nor have I called for any sort of vote.

You said that car ownership would be higher in Streatham Wells - I was pointing out that the most recent census had it at less than 50% with access to a car or van.

You also said that Valley Road was a public transport desert - I pointed out that it had a bus.

That's it - just wanted to put some facts out there

 

[sparkybird]

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.

I did want to respond to this, although there's been a lot of discussion since.

I support the scheme because it makes the streets safer for all residents - both able bodied and disabled. I also think that BB holders should be given access through the filters. However, I can't make this happen, but that doesn't mean I automatically agree with the policy that Lambeth have gone with.

Clearly for you, a car is extremely important and you need to use it. However, the majority of disabled Londoners do not have a driving licence (62% compared to 45 % non disabled) nor do they have access to a vehicle (58% compared to 38% non disabled). How do we make neighbourhoods better and safer for those who aren't driving? I would say by limiting non disabled car access - these drivers WILL often have a choice about how to travel and 'by car' should not be the default mode.

 

[Bus Stopped]

What happens if you don’t get enough turnout in the local elections though?

Nothing there is no minimum turn out. Some get less than 10%.

But decision still get made by those elected.

 

[Bus Stopped]

Does anyone know what has happened with pollution on the main roads since the Streatham wells LTN was implemented?

As said before they are already the most polluted and have a heavy density of housing.

Does it matter?

 

[thebackrow]

Does anyone know what has happened with pollution on the main roads since the Streatham wells LTN was implemented?

As said before they are already the most polluted and have a heavy density of housing.

Does it matter?

This guy is a prominent anti and even he says short term air quality measures/changes are not a useful data point.

The overall trends on all the main roads shows air quality improving year on year - in the main due to cleaner vehicle emissions which ULEZ has accelerated. Air quality was far worse 2/5/10 years ago

 

[edcraw]

Does anyone know what has happened with pollution on the main roads since the Streatham wells LTN was implemented?

As said before they are already the most polluted and have a heavy density of housing.

Does it matter?

It’d be very difficult to tell so far as lots of things effect air pollution. It’s telling that most of those against LTNs are also against ULEZ though.

 

[Smick]

Whoa there cowboy! I've never said that car ownership is a proxy for LTN support nor have I called for any sort of vote.

You said that car ownership would be higher in Streatham Wells - I was pointing out that the most recent census had it at less than 50% with access to a car or van.

You also said that Valley Road was a public transport desert - I pointed out that it had a bus.

That's it - just wanted to put some facts out there

What was your initial point in quoting car ownership in Streatham Wells? I took it to mean those without a car would benefit, and therefore be in favour of the LTN. Apologies if you meant something else.

And I didn't say that Valley Road is a public transport desert. I said it is one of the worst served roads for public transport in the borough, which I still believe. The 315 is timetabled every 20 minutes and is a short wheelbase bus. To get to any of the train stations, you're maybe talking 20 minutes walk, often over steep arches to clear the rail line into Streatham.

 

[Bus Stopped]

This guy is a prominent anti and even he says short term air quality measures/changes are not a useful data point.

The overall trends on all the main roads shows air quality improving year on year - in the main due to cleaner vehicle emissions which ULEZ has accelerated. Air quality was far worse 2/5/10 years ago

Thanks. I can imagine it’s hard to measure. Obviously good ULEZ is in place and reducing pollution. Personally I think it should go much further.

But I guess the point remains that it should be measured. If an LTN pushes pollution from side roads to main roads, is that ok? Even if overall things are improving because of ULEZ.

 

[Smick]

Does anyone know what has happened with pollution on the main roads since the Streatham wells LTN was implemented?

As said before they are already the most polluted and have a heavy density of housing.

Does it matter?

It doesn't matter in relation to the LTN.

The increase in electric cars, electric buses, natural attrition of older cars, even since the implementation, will have had a positive impact. Offices beginning to require more attendance from staff will have had a negative impact.

You can't look at one metric in isolation.

 

[edcraw]

Nothing there is no minimum turn out. Some get less than 10%.

But decision still get made by those elected.

I was asking if there was to be a minimum turnout for local elections what the consequence of not achieving it would be. It’s clear what it could be for a referendum.

 

[edcraw]

Thanks. I can imagine it’s hard to measure. Obviously good ULEZ is in place and reducing pollution. Personally I think it should go much further.

But I guess the point remains that it should be measured. If an LTN pushes pollution from side roads to main roads, is that ok? Even if overall things are improving because of ULEZ.

The aim of LTNs is to reduce traffic over all & evidence suggests this is the case.

LTNs appear not to push traffic on to boundary roads, London study finds

Exclusive: number of motor vehicles in 46 low-traffic neighbourhoods studied also significantly reduced

www.theguardian.com

 

[Bus Stopped]

I was asking if there was to be a minimum turnout for local elections what the consequence of not achieving it would be. It’s clear what it could be for a referendum.

The consequence would be that nothing would function. The point is though that it’s claimed that the mandate for implementing the LTN is the local elections, which have no minimum turnout, and are about far more than an LTN. Yet consultation about a specific issue, which would have a far more direct mandate, apparently needs a minimum turnout.

And others who say everything is far too complicated for people so we need benevolent dictatorship.

 

[Bus Stopped]

The aim of LTNs is to reduce traffic over all & evidence suggests this is the case.

LTNs appear not to push traffic on to boundary roads, London study finds

Exclusive: number of motor vehicles in 46 low-traffic neighbourhoods studied also significantly reduced

www.theguardian.com

I mean measuring what is causing traffic throughout London must be very complicated (like air pollution). Traffic has been going up the last two years and at this rate will soon be a pre covid levels. Whether LTNs displace traffic further afield is an unknown.

 

[thebackrow]

. To get to any of the train stations, you're maybe talking 20 minutes walk, often over steep arches to clear the rail line into Streatham.

My last home was 16 minutes walk (per Google) from Brixton tube (and about the same to Clapham North) and I always thought I had excellent public transport.

16 minutes takes you half way down valley road from Streatham hill station.

 

[thebackrow]

Thanks. I can imagine it’s hard to measure. Obviously good ULEZ is in place and reducing pollution. Personally I think it should go much further.

But I guess the point remains that it should be measured. If an LTN pushes pollution from side roads to main roads, is that ok? Even if overall things are improving because of ULEZ.

Yes. Because the public health outcomes overall are positive for society.

 

[teuchter]

Traffic has been going up the last two years and at this rate will soon be a pre covid levels.

What's this statement based on?

 

[Bus Stopped]

What's this statement based on?

Road traffic statistics - London region

roadtraffic.dft.gov.uk

 

[teuchter]

Well, of course it's been going up the previous two years there is data for, because it was reverting from the very unusually low levels seen during the covid years. But that doesn't tell us anything about whether or when it's going to reach pre-covid levels.

 

[Bus Stopped]

View attachment 410071

Well, of course it's been going up the previous two years there is data for, because it was reverting from the very unusually low levels seen during the covid years. But that doesn't tell us anything about whether or when it's going to reach pre-covid levels.

Yes I agree I didn’t say otherwise. It will be interesting to see 2023, my hunch is it will be close to pre Covid levels. LTNs even when they work well are a bit of a sticking plaster.

 

[thebackrow]

Yes I agree I didn’t say otherwise. It will be interesting to see 2023, my hunch is it will be close to pre Covid levels. LTNs even when they work well are a bit of a sticking plaster.

They still cover a tiny area of Greater London. Expecting the addition of a few more each year to have a significant and immediate impact on London wide averages (when there are many other influences as well) is a stretch. Habits take time to change. People won’t dispense if their car immediately but the next time it needs replacing, if they have alternatives, they’re less likely to. There’s evidence that kids who are taken to school in box bikes progress to riding themselves.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?hl=en&mid=1XlpvN9R-Wg7qZHyezO8y-eVlftr4e0WX&ll=51.516975804561284%2C-0.21828576419061996&z=10

 

[teuchter]

Yes I agree I didn’t say otherwise. It will be interesting to see 2023, my hunch is it will be close to pre Covid levels. LTNs even when they work well are a bit of a sticking plaster.

The point is, we don't really know what the "actual" trend is since 2020, it will take a couple more years of data to be able to say anything very meaningful. Maybe traffic levels will settle at a somewhat lower level than pre covide, maybe at a level higher. And then there can be lots of arguments about what part LTNs have played.

When you say "LTNs even when they work well are a bit of a sticking plaster" - what's that statement based on and what does it actually mean?

 

[Crispy]

When you say "LTNs even when they work well are a bit of a sticking plaster" - what's that statement based on and what does it actually mean?

They are stick without carrot. No parallel improvements to bus or cycling infrastructure.

 

[thebackrow]

They are stick without carrot. No parallel improvements to bus or cycling infrastructure.

There have been numerous improvements to cycling and public transport infra alongside LTNs since 2020. In Lambeth

• rosendale road
• Loughborough Road
• Norwood road
• Upgrades to a3 cycleway
• QW5
• 24/7 bus lanes in TfL roads and Kennington Road

Quite apart from much better conditions for cycling (and bus priority) on the roads with the LTNs. You can ride from the south of Streatham to the northern edge of Lambeth now though LTNs and cycleways.

By any measure much more in the last 4 years than the 10 before

 

[Winot]

They are stick without carrot. No parallel improvements to bus or cycling infrastructure.

I'd argue that LTNs are cycling infrastructure.

 

[Bus Stopped]

They still cover a tiny area of Greater London. Expecting the addition of a few more each year to have a significant and immediate impact on London wide averages (when there are many other influences as well) is a stretch. Habits take time to change. People won’t dispense if their car immediately but the next time it needs replacing, if they have alternatives, they’re less likely to. There’s evidence that kids who are taken to school in box bikes progress to riding themselves.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?hl=en&mid=1XlpvN9R-Wg7qZHyezO8y-eVlftr4e0WX&ll=51.516975804561284%2C-0.21828576419061996&z=10

I honestly don’t think LTNs will make people give their cars up, it will just push more and more traffic on to the artery roads. Obviously there will come a point when that will cause gridlock, including for buses.

More radical action would be needed.

Inside the Lambeth LTNs the roads are still lined with cars. It would be interesting to see stats for car ownership in LTNs and if it’s gone down.

 

[Bus Stopped]

The point is, we don't really know what the "actual" trend is since 2020, it will take a couple more years of data to be able to say anything very meaningful. Maybe traffic levels will settle at a somewhat lower level than pre covide, maybe at a level higher. And then there can be lots of arguments about what part LTNs have played.

When you say "LTNs even when they work well are a bit of a sticking plaster" - what's that statement based on and what does it actually mean?

It means I don’t think they will lower car usage much. You disagree, fair enough. If car usage in London keeps going up obviously a lot more is needed.

 

[teuchter]

It means I don’t think they will lower car usage much. You disagree, fair enough. If car usage in London keeps going up obviously a lot more is needed.

I'm wondering why it is you don't think they will have much of an effect; whether that's based on looking at what's happened in other places where they have been introduced. In other words, whether you'd say it's an informed opinion or just a personal reckon.