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

[alex_]

I still haven't seen an explanation of how LTNs add 45 minutes each way to Greenwich.

right now - ie peak school run, Waze says 54 minutes from Brixton hill to Greenwich.

so - they don’t

 

[teuchter]

It's not as black and white as being for LTNs or not.

In Loughborough junction I know local people had concerns about traffic. The Council didn't consult properly. It didn't listen.

When the Council tried to impose its version of traffic reduction ( supported by LJAG) it meant in end many locals opposed the scheme.

The opposition to it mainly wanted the scheme abandoned entirely. And that's what they got.

What are the latest posts on the LJ road madness facebook page? They are from 2016 celebrating the removal of the final two blocks. Since then, nothing about seeking some kind of alternative solution to air pollution or anything else. LTN gone, job done, no further action.

 

[Gramsci]

The opposition to it mainly wanted the scheme abandoned entirely. And that's what they got.

What are the latest posts on the LJ road madness facebook page? They are from 2016 celebrating the removal of the final two blocks. Since then, nothing about seeking some kind of alternative solution to air pollution or anything else. LTN gone, job done, no further action.

Incorrect

There was follow up consultation on remodeling the Loughborough road/ Coldharbour lane junction.

Plans were developed and finished for this which the Council did not implement.

Even though they had support from all sections of the community.

Much later officers cited cost as reason not to go ahead.

What I said was I know that some residents did want measures to alter traffic/ traffic calming measures.

The Council didn't consult properly.

End result was, as seen now, ending up with two opposing groups. With no possibility of local compromise.

In LJ there were also local factor. Dislike of LJAG amongst some of the Council tenants. As LJAG supported the scheme they didn't. Whether that was fair or not is another question. But it was a factor.

My view was that this was a bungled Council scheme. The Labour party in Lambeth have no real links to the working class.

Opposing the LJ road closure was also seen as way to stick it to the Council. Bit like Brexit vote.

So factors not all related to traffic.

 

[Loose meat]

Every single time I've walked past that gate I've seen several cars go through.

At LJ in 2015/16, in the end - once they understood the cctv wasn't working or the council wasn't issuing tickets - there was mass civil disobedience from car owners.

There really was an extraordinary outpouring of entitlement on SM (twitter, anyway) from the Railton/Herne Hill area people who needed their short cut - for example, the outrage of Stella Duffy her partner and their internet chums was something to behold.

 

[Loose meat]

right now - ie peak school run, Waze says 54 minutes from Brixton hill to Greenwich.

so - they don’t

It's called the south circ. How is Camberwell/Peckham .. stupid games.

 

[girasol]

Not LTN, but TFL, from Facebook. It's terrifying the number of drivers who don't check for cyclists before turning left, but it seems since wands were installed these types of collision have increased. It's all eye witness accounts for now, so for those who must have official reports for everything you'll have to wait a bit longer for the stats...

 

[teuchter]

Incorrect

There was follow up consultation on remodeling the Loughborough road/ Coldharbour lane junction.

Plans were developed and finished for this which the Council did not implement.

I know about that, but they were very minor alterations weren't they? They would have been better than nothing and I would have liked to see them implemented. But they were miles away from an LTN approach; they would have had minimal impact on anything other than the very local conditions at the junction.

 

[paolo]

There’s two blockages near me, one in Lambert Road, one in Lyham Road.

I have a car and bicycle.

Should I join an action group?

 

[teuchter]

Not LTN, but TFL, from Facebook. It's terrifying the number of drivers who don't check for cyclists before turning left, but it seems since wands were installed these types of collision have increased. It's all eye witness accounts for now, so for those who must have official reports for everything you'll have to wait a bit longer for the stats...

Great, some anecdata aimed at getting rid of the TfL cycle lanes now.

 

[girasol]

Great, some anecdata aimed at getting rid of the TfL cycle lanes now.

I don't think that's the intention (certainly not what I'm saying)... The cycle lanes have been there for years, but the poles have been there for about a month.

Also, what's wrong with winess accounts? This is from someone who sees that part of the street every day.

 

[girasol]

Like I said, will have to wait for longer for official data...

 

[alex_]

It's called the south circ. How is Camberwell/Peckham .. stupid games.

waze says 39 minutes at school leaving time, so still no

 

[teuchter]

I don't think that's the intention (certainly not what I'm saying)... The cycle lanes have been there for years, but the poles have been there for about a month.

Also, what's wrong with winess accounts? This is from someone who sees that part of the street every day.

Ok, I was assuming it had been posted on an anti LTN page, and that it might have been someone who doesn't like the wands separating off the cycle lanes so that vehicles can't dodge into them. That assumption may have been unfounded.

We don't know how these observed accidents relate to the TfL data, which will only cover reported ones, and we don't know how they define 'casualty' and so on. And if there has been an increase in cyclists and or motor traffic post covid then that has to be factored in.

 

[Gramsci]

I know about that, but they were very minor alterations weren't they? They would have been better than nothing and I would have liked to see them implemented. But they were miles away from an LTN approach; they would have had minimal impact on anything other than the very local conditions at the junction.

Perhaps local people wanted what you might call minor alterations. Perhaps local people don't see it the way you do.

Ive heard no complaints about the consultation after the Council imposed road closures were withdrawn.

The closure of Loughborough road was clearly not wanted.

I do think the Council could have talked to the residents group on north end of Loughbororugh road. They had ideas for traffic calming they wanted.

Also there is I think support for the closure of the Padfield road closure. As it is a rat run.

But I dont think their is local support for what you term LTN.

A possibilty is that incremental changes could have been made in conjunction with the local community.

Once people had seen these work, they see that they are listened to then further changes could have been proposed leading to an LTN of some sort.

This kind of poliitcal / consultation work is something this Council could learn to do. After all its supposed to be a Cooperative Council.

Doing things with the community not to them because they know best.

What the Council has managed to do is cause hardline divisions. This did not have to happen.

The Council have decided to use pandemic to impose LTNs on local communities. This has caused backlash. This was predicatable. Shows the Council have learnt nothing from LJ failure.

It could be the Council can ride this out. Whatever happens this is not good for local democracy.

 

[teuchter]

Perhaps local people wanted what you might call minor alterations. Perhaps local people don't see it the way you do.

Ive heard no complaints about the consultation after the Council imposed road closures were withdrawn.

The closure of Loughborough road was clearly not wanted.

I do think the Council could have talked to the residents group on north end of Loughbororugh road. They had ideas for traffic calming they wanted.

Also there is I think support for the closure of the Padfield road closure. As it is a rat run.

But I dont think their is local support for what you term LTN.

A possibilty is that incremental changes could have been made in conjunction with the local community.

Once people had seen these work, they see that they are listened to then further changes could have been proposed leading to an LTN of some sort.

This kind of poliitcal / consultation work is something this Council could learn to do. After all its supposed to be a Cooperative Council.

Doing things with the community not to them because they know best.

What the Council has managed to do is cause hardline divisions. This did not have to happen.

The Council have decided to use pandemic to impose LTNs on local communities. This has caused backlash. This was predicatable. Shows the Council have learnt nothing from LJ failure.

It could be the Council can ride this out. Whatever happens this is not good for local democracy.

You could do all the incremental stuff you wanted - a bit of traffic calming here and there (which is something that's actually been happening most places, including around LJ) - but as soon as you propose to make somewhere a no-through route, you'll get the same people kicking off about it.

If you want to do stuff incrementally - try and get some of these schemes currently proposed to stick. If they can be made to work, then 2 or 3 years after their implementation show them to people in other areas. I think you'd be more likely to persuade people of the benefits that way.

 

[Gramsci]

You could do all the incremental stuff you wanted - a bit of traffic calming here and there (which is something that's actually been happening most places, including around LJ) - but as soon as you propose to make somewhere a no-through route, you'll get the same people kicking off about it.

If you want to do stuff incrementally - try and get some of these schemes currently proposed to stick. If they can be made to work, then 2 or 3 years after their implementation show them to people in other areas. I think you'd be more likely to persuade people of the benefits that way.

The "same people".

Always comes back to that.

Ive tried to explain myself more than once and I don't think you get it.

The Council said at beginning of the Brixton Liveable Neighbourhood consultation they had learnt the lessons of LJ fiasco. That they would not be implementing the BLN if they could not get support. That the consultation process this tiime would be different. To get the full funding they would have to show the Mayor and TFL that there was local support and they had consulted properly.

Pandemic comes along and Council find they can ditch that and implement it anyway.

Im not supporting these LTNs wholeheartedly for that reason.

After all in LJ it should have been easy for the party of the workers to get Council tenants of Loughbororugh Estate to support no through traffic from the better of suburbs using their Council estate as commuter route.

 

[Gramsci]

You could do all the incremental stuff you wanted - a bit of traffic calming here and there (which is something that's actually been happening most places, including around LJ) - but as soon as you propose to make somewhere a no-through route, you'll get the same people kicking off about it.

If you want to do stuff incrementally - try and get some of these schemes currently proposed to stick. If they can be made to work, then 2 or 3 years after their implementation show them to people in other areas. I think you'd be more likely to persuade people of the benefits that way.

And an anecdote.

After the LJ road closure failure I ws chatting to a senior Council officer.

They started to blame LJAG for the fiasco.

Lesson. Don't ever trust the Council. They will sell people down the river to protect themselves.

I did stick up for LJAG. As I thought this ws unfair.

Said it was the Counciil decision to do this not LJAGs.

Officer didn't like that at all.

 

[Gramsci]

When I saw Council had persuaded various community groups to support the LTNs my heart sank.

My view would be Council has taken this decision to implement LTNs. It's up to Council in that case. I would advice any group Im in to stay neutral.

 

[sleaterkinney]

I don't think that's the intention (certainly not what I'm saying)... The cycle lanes have been there for years, but the poles have been there for about a month.

Also, what's wrong with winess accounts? This is from someone who sees that part of the street every day.

Do you think the poles should be removed?

 

[Gramsci]

For those interested, here is the full LTN report for Wandsworth
https://t.co/NixLu1xxnY?amp=1

and here, what triggered its review and eventual removal
View attachment 230417



Someone posted yet another video of cyclists going on the pavement/jumping red lights on the group - and once again a few of us are telling them to stop posting finger pointing bullshit. The group isn't "mono thought", and having cyclists in there helped educate, and minimise, divisive, hateful finger pointing and keep it objective. The admins were also strict on this too.

The point of the group was to unite against LTNs, not to be dickheads about other road users. There were people hating on 4x4 drivers too, of course. Lots of virtue signalling from all directions. Instead of trying to understand other people's motivations and find solutions, some people resorted to directing their anger at other road users. Fortunately there were enough people in there who kept saying that's not ok and that they need to direct their energy towards the council. Common sense really.

I see the report saying that emergency services raised significant concerns in Wandsworth in relation to response times once the LTNs were put in place has been ignored by posters here.

So the discussion has been displaced onto conjectures about poles.

 

[Gramsci]

Perhaps the emergency services in Wandsworth are all car nuts.

 

[sleaterkinney]

I see the report saying that emergency services raised significant concerns in Wandsworth in relation to response times once the LTNs were put in place has been ignored by posters here.

So the discussion has been displaced onto conjectures about poles.

Why are you stirring like this?.

 

[sleaterkinney]

You don’t own and police this thread, as much as you’d like to.

 

[toblerone3]

The Low Traffic Neighbourhoods do have genuinely radical consequences and they do mean that people will have to change their travel behaviour, change their lifestyles. change the location of their leisure activities. change where they live and change where they work and how they organise their work. This is the long term path to sustainability and it is no surprise that people feel uncomfortable about it and their is a lot of conservatism with a small c. On a specific level changing travel behaviour is not just a change in consumer choice like choosing brand A over brand B it involves consideration of a vested interest - a material purchase of an expensive piece of machinery (a private car). Also an emotional investment in car-owning status. The majority of people in London especially Inner London (who do not own a car) are not in that situation. They do suffer every day from the externaliities of car dominated streets.

Sometimes it feels like us non car owners are somehow now not proper adults and car owners are. This is unfair.

 

[Gramsci]

For those interested, here is the full LTN report for Wandsworth
https://t.co/NixLu1xxnY?amp=1

and here, what triggered its review and eventual removal
View attachment 230417



Someone posted yet another video of cyclists going on the pavement/jumping red lights on the group - and once again a few of us are telling them to stop posting finger pointing bullshit. The group isn't "mono thought", and having cyclists in there helped educate, and minimise, divisive, hateful finger pointing and keep it objective. The admins were also strict on this too.

The point of the group was to unite against LTNs, not to be dickheads about other road users. There were people hating on 4x4 drivers too, of course. Lots of virtue signalling from all directions. Instead of trying to understand other people's motivations and find solutions, some people resorted to directing their anger at other road users. Fortunately there were enough people in there who kept saying that's not ok and that they need to direct their energy towards the council. Common sense really.

The quotes from Council report are from page 110.

The report also says that the Council will be monitering the situation. That the pandemic has altered road use. More car journeys possibly due to people not wanting to use buses.

32. Officers will continue to monitor the network at and around the suspended LTN areas
and to continue to gather data that will help the Council better understand the impact
of the TfL measures on the road network and the effects of removing the
LTNs. Officers will also continue to monitor the network generally and to gather
relevant data to better understand the continuing impact of Covid-19 on transport
behaviours, including any movement or otherwise from the current high propensity for
the use of the car relative to public transport and including cycling statistics.

Looking through other parts of the Council report and Wandsworth are bringing in "pop up" cycle lanes, in one area making car free on weekends to encourage local business / pedestrian use and making some bus lanes extended hours.

So using pandemic powers to encourage cycle use , public transport, local business and pedestrians.

These measures have had positive feedback.

Its the LTNs that had negative feedback.

So the picture in Wandsworth is mixed. Support for some alterations to road use and not others.

So idea that its LTNs or nothing is wrong.

(Not saying you are saying this. Its that looking at the Wandsworth Council report and its a mixed bag. Its that some posters here see situation as LTNs and nothing else is good enough)

 

[Gramsci]

The Low Traffic Neighbourhoods do have genuinely radical consequences and they do mean that people will have to change their travel behaviour, change their lifestyles. change the location of their leisure activities. change where they live and change where they work and how they organise their work. This is the long term path to sustainability and it is no surprise that people feel uncomfortable about it and their is a lot of conservatism with a small c. On a specific level changing travel behaviour is not just a change in consumer choice like choosing brand A over brand B it involves consideration of a vested interest - a material purchase of an expensive piece of machinery (a private car). Also an emotional investment in car-owning status. The majority of people in London especially Inner London (who do not own a car) are not in that situation. They do suffer every day from the externaliities of car dominated streets.

Sometimes it feels like us non car owners are somehow now not proper adults and car owners are. This is unfair.

Individualist response to a social issue.

Its up to the the individual to change.

This shows how neo liberal thinking has permeated into society as common sense.

BTW Im a non car owner.

 

[toblerone3]

Individualist response to a social issue.

Its up to the the individual to change.

This shows how neo liberal thinking has permeated into society as common sense.

BTW Im a non car owner.

No not right wing. Yes it is bit of a Big Green Brother kind of thing. But its 'gentle' very gentle. None of the radical things I mentioned in my last post need to happen today or in a few months time. But lets think about how we are living. Low Traffic Neighbourhoods bring very great benefits to the majority of the population in urban areas. The minority of car owners are the short term losers. And ultimately it is agreed on a community level between you and your neighbours.

 

[Gramsci]

You don’t own and police this thread, as much as you’d like to.

What on earth are you going on about?

How can I "police" this thread?

 

[teuchter]

Individualist response to a social issue.

Its up to the the individual to change.

This shows how neo liberal thinking has permeated into society as common sense.

BTW Im a non car owner.

This doesn't make any sense. The individualist response is the car. LTNs are all about encouraging use of communal resources and sharing them as equitably as possible.

 

[Gramsci]

This doesn't make any sense. The individualist response is the car. LTNs are all about encouraging use of communal resources and sharing them as equitably as possible.

I was referrig to the post. It was full of "people will have to change" this and that. Their "lifestyles" for example.

I didnt think LTNs were about encouragiing use of communal resources or sharing them.

LTNs are specifically about stopping through traffic/ stopping rat runs. Hence the name.