Loughborough Junction public space improvements - consultation begins

[Brixton Hatter]

"LJ Road Madness" have posted a 30+ page response to the road closures on Facebook here, which is mostly gleaned from their petition responses.

Among the evidence is a stat showing that well over two thirds (69.2%) of the 4,000 or so petition responses came from people living outside of the local area (Coldharbour, Vassell, Herne Hill wards.)

 

[critical1]

"LJ Road Madness" have posted a 30+ page response to the road closures on Facebook here, which is mostly gleaned from their petition responses.

Among the evidence is a stat showing that well over two thirds (69.2%) of the 4,000 or so petition responses came from people living outside of the local area (Coldharbour, Vassell, Herne Hill wards.)

Are they not citizens... but statistically the majority did come from the affected areas... Stats are strange things

 

[teuchter]

"LJ Road Madness" have posted a 30+ page response to the road closures on Facebook here, which is mostly gleaned from their petition responses.

Among the evidence is a stat showing that well over two thirds (69.2%) of the 4,000 or so petition responses came from people living outside of the local area (Coldharbour, Vassell, Herne Hill wards.)

It's written in the style and format of an objective "report" but looking through it quickly it seems that it's just repeating the claims that are being made in the petition comments and on facebook etc.

I could see several places where it was stated as "fact" that traffic on CHL has increased substantially, as well as various side roads. Maybe it has but I'd rather make that judgement based on the actual traffic counts (and that onjective measure has probably been sucessfully sabotaged by bringing the mid-way review forward along with this strong pressure to abandon things before we get to see the real long-term results).

It also states that the traffic count things can't distinguish between cars and bicycles (and therefore won't be able to tell us anything about increasing/decreasing cycle usage). I thought it was pretty standard that they can - but I may be wrong.

 

[teuchter]

One of the letters in that report.

Seems to me that the problem here is not that it's difficult to get to the address, but that it is difficult to get there for someone trying to navigate with GPS. And that the problem could be fairly easily solved if the closures were included properly in satnav maps. I don't know what the process is for that to happen, but if there would have been a way of making sure that happened when the closures came in it would have saved a lot of hassle.

Looking at the route to Mr Workshops from Streatham - there's no great diversion. You just have to know the right way to go.

One of the other businesses (garage) talks about customers not being able to get through. Again, the problems seems to be to do with finding their way there. This is a genuine problem but one, it seems to me, that could be solved without abandoning the whole scheme.

 

[critical1]

Lambeth Official Consultation Survey dated 13th November has now been CLOSED

Why?...
Was there too many complaints about the road closures or too many about the consultation?

 

[critical1]

In my opinion it would be better if to travel the extra mile than abandoning the whole experiment. After all it is an experiment a very expensive one.

If vehicles and other modes of transportation are effectively banned, this would possibly drive (excuse the pun) a mass exodus from the LJ area, it would no doubt be replaced by younge healthy affluent residents who would relish the prospect of living in the middle of a city with no other means of transportation apart from bipedal transport.

The resultant large amount of cyclists would then have to ponder where to store their bikes, deliveries will have to be by mule & cart or some sort of cycle contraption. The resultant healthy options for those who are ill will probably see that they are supported by the community of cycle volunteers who would take them out shopping and to hospital appointments in a speedy and comfortable manner.

Delivery of heavy items would have to be left at special points at the edge of the experiment. If your business is in the area obviously you would have a special team of cyclists to move your goods in and out of the exclusion area.

The resultant extra business would then be for bike parts and spares which the majority are imported, but there may well be opportunities to start manufacturing bikes in the industrial areas that are vacant. After all you can't have a good bike and no spares.

New buildings would have to be artisan hand crafted works, and materials would be brought into the area by train. As for raw materials for bricks I hear London clay is very near the surface in Loughborough so maybe a brick factory maybe in order.

Examples of self sufficient communities are everywhere but mostly found outside of cities, I think Detroit is a fine example of lack of infrastructure a fine place to have a bicycle post peak oil, peak solar power...

 

[bimble]

I'd rather make that judgement based on the actual traffic counts (and that objective measure has probably been successfully sabotaged by bringing the mid-way review forward along with this strong pressure to abandon things before we get to see the real long-term results).

'Successfully sabotaged' ?

The current page says: "Traffic counts have been taken at 71 different locations in the surrounding area to measure the impact on neighbouring roads". The document that lists the original measuring points (the before measurements) has 203 locations for traffic counts.
Is it saboteurs who made 132 of them disappear?

These minimal traffic counts seem to have been done pretty much entirely during the recent half term holiday.
That's directly against their own established guidelines for how to get useful measurements.
Unsurprisingly I got no response from George Wright when I asked him about this.

There was always going to be a 3 month review of the scheme.
Yes the council chose to bring it forward by one month as a sort of gesture but can you really blame saboteurs for the decision to count the cars at less than half the before spots and during the 2 week school holiday in direct contravention of their own rules?

I for one am very annoyed that the results of the traffic counting will probably be useless because the methodology used was shambolic.
Counting cars was always meant to be their main way of assessing the success or otherwise of the experiment.
Given the general level of incompetence displayed at every turn in the implementation of this thing, I suppose it's not surprising that this too has been completely bungled but i do resent you blaming it on 'sabotage'.

 

[bimble]

If its pie in the sky then there is something wrong with the society as it works now.

I think you're onto something there.

 

[CH1]

Delivery of heavy items would have to be left at special points at the edge of the experiment. If your business is in the area obviously you would have a special team of cyclists to move your goods in and out of the exclusion area.

Sure.... Brixton has a Doddle now. Obviously time for one in LJ to broaden our "offer"

 

[irf520]

Maybe this is all a clever way to solve the unemployment problem. Instead of one person driving a lorry or van delivering goods, you could have 6 people on one of those ridiculous 'PediBus' things I sometimes see pedaling around near Borough market holding everyone up.

There you go, a promising new career option - "Pack Horse".

 

[bimble]

Maybe this is all a clever way to solve the unemployment problem. Instead of one person driving a lorry or van delivering goods, you could have 6 people on one of those ridiculous 'PediBus' things I sometimes see pedaling around near Borough market holding everyone up.

There you go, a promising new career option - "Pack Horse".

And the construction of Higgs etc could employ loads more people if it adopted the traditional Indian method where getting women to carry bricks by head is cheaper than using petrol. Everyone's a winner.

 

[teuchter]

Sorry to interrupt you all in the middle of channelling your inner (or outer) Clarksons.

The document that lists the original measuring points (the before measurements) has 203 locations for traffic counts.

Which document is this?

 

[bimble]

That one that I have no idea how to upload / share. Long spreadsheet received from someone's freedom of info request

 

[concerned1]

I would also like to point out that PRIOR to the Road closures 71 traffic counts were taken.
This review they have taken 23!
Not 71, 23 and as we all know they were during the school holidays!
Barrington Road from Loughborough Road end along it was NOT counted yet loads of vehicles were using it and cutting through the small private estate road to get out onto St James's Crescent therefore bypassing Angell Road/St James's Crescent turning which is very narrow.

 

[critical1]

And the construction of Higgs etc could employ loads more people if it adopted the traditional Indian method where getting women to carry bricks by head is cheaper than using petrol. Everyone's a winner.

I asked this question once... Why do you use people instead of machinary? Answer was People are cheap!

 

[bimble]

This review they have taken 23!

!
If you have documents showing that it was 23 not 71 please post em up, because Lambeth website says 71..
23 would be..properly pathetic.

 

[concerned1]

!
If you have documents showing that it was 23 not 71 please post em up, because Lambeth website says 71..
23 would be..properly pathetic.

LJAG receive a response from Councillor Lib Peck with regard to experimental road closure | Loughborough Junction Action Group

 

[teuchter]

Traffic counts have been taken at 71 different locations in the surrounding area to measure the impact on neighbouring roads and repeat counts will be taken in key locations. This data will form part of the review, the results of which should be known in mid-November.

The review will also take into account;

· Traffic survey counts (including speed and volume surveys from 23 locations, and video surveys at six locations to assess the changes in volumes of motor traffic and cycling)

It's not entirely clear what it means but I would understand that as saying 71 locations, 23 of which have certain extra types of information.

Not 23 instead of 71.

 

[CH1]

LJAG receive a response from Councillor Lib Peck with regard to experimental road closure | Loughborough Junction Action Group

This was LJAG spinnning - "holding Lambeth Council to account"

If I was Lib Peck I would have written back saying "Can't you make your mind up?"
I represented Thornton Ward once, and clearly as my successor in title so to speak Lib Peck deserves my encouragement.

Lib Peck has however done a very BAD THING.
"The final decision on whether to proceed will be made by the Cabinet Member and will be based on a comprehensive report which will include officer recommendations."
is about as undemocratic as you can get.

"What about the workers?" I say. What indeed? says Lib Peck

 

[critical1]

This was LJAG spinnning - "holding Lambeth Council to account".......

Lib Peck has however done a very BAD THING.
"The final decision on whether to proceed will be made by the Cabinet Member and will be based on a comprehensive report which will include officer recommendations."
is about as undemocratic as you can get.

"What about the workers?" I say. What indeed? says Lib Peck

Who?

 

[bimble]

LJAG receive a response from Councillor Lib Peck with regard to experimental road closure | Loughborough Junction Action Group

Lib Peck letter is odd. But just the traffic counting bit:

"Traffic survey counts (including speed and volume surveys from 23 locations, and video surveys at six locations to assess the changes in volumes of motor traffic and cycling)
· Review of traffic flows (using the Council’s CCTV system to carry out a review of traffic flows on the key route of Coldharbour Lane.)"

teuchter Maybe we're not reading the same thing?
It absolutely looks to me like she's saying that only 23 locations had speed & volume 'surveys' (& surveys definitely does just mean those rubber lines) during the closures.
Plus another 6 locations were 'studied' using CCTV cameras. Those mostly on coldharbour lane.
?
It seems to me that any ambiguity in the writing is completely on purpose to be honest but .. if they had just done the obvious thing and used the same locations to measure before and after there would be no need for any such silliness. No?

 

[bimble]

Lib Peck has however done a very BAD THING.
"The final decision on whether to proceed will be made by the Cabinet Member and will be based on a comprehensive report which will include officer recommendations."
is about as undemocratic as you can get.

Seriously, it really is amazing (to me) that the decision on this rests with one person alone, Cllr jenny Braithwaite.

 

[bimble]

Here's a picture of George Wright and Jennifer Braithwaite having a happier day,
It's from when Lambeth received the prize for ‘Best New Public Space’ at the London Planning Awards, for the Clapham Old Town Regeneration Project, last year. Can imagine this may have given them a certain confidence to plough on.
GW has the weirdest posture. Like a slack string puppet.

 

[teuchter]

Lib Peck letter is odd. But just the traffic counting bit:

"Traffic survey counts (including speed and volume surveys from 23 locations, and video surveys at six locations to assess the changes in volumes of motor traffic and cycling)
· Review of traffic flows (using the Council’s CCTV system to carry out a review of traffic flows on the key route of Coldharbour Lane.)"

teuchter Maybe we're not reading the same thing?
It absolutely looks to me like she's saying that only 23 locations had speed & volume 'surveys' (& surveys definitely does just mean those rubber lines) during the closures.
Plus another 6 locations were 'studied' using CCTV cameras. Those mostly on coldharbour lane.
?
It seems to me that any ambiguity in the writing is completely on purpose to be honest but .. if they had just done the obvious thing and used the same locations to measure before and after there would be no need for any such silliness. No?

71 traffic count locations (number of vehicles)
23 counted speed as well.
6 included video survey

There's nothing that suggests to me that the number of locations surveyed (to whatever extent) has been different before and "after".

But we will hopefully find out once the actual info comes out in the next couple of weeks.

Could be a slogan for the whole thread.

 

[CH1]

Seriously, it really is amazing (to me) that the decision on this rests with one person alone, Cllr jenny Braithwaite.

And one who hugs proponents of the scheme at a previous meeting.
Advised by one whose job could be on the line if it doesn't go through.

 

[bimble]

71 traffic count locations (number of vehicles)
23 counted speed as well.
6 included video survey

There's nothing that suggests to me that the number of locations surveyed (to whatever extent) has been different before and "after".

Just wow. I like a guinness as much as the next person but.. really?
1) this bit says the number of 'before counts" seems to be 71.
It then says "repeat counts will be taken in KEY LOCATIONS".

This is not saying they will measure them again one day in the future, it's saying that for the review (i.e. this review now) they have only done 'key locations'.
I agree the tenses are a bit messy but I blame that on incompetence/ obscurantism .


2) It then says

What are you seeing here that I'm not? It says 23 locations have been surveyed for speed & volume during the closures. Not 71. 23. You think that some other sort of mysterious measuring was used at the missing 48?
What people noticed in the area a couple of weeks ago was sets of double rubber lines. These measure speed & volume.
Because they were in so few locations (& different from the 'before' counts) I mistakenly assumed they were not to do with this road closure thing at all but instead something to do with the 20MPH introduction, but seems I was just wrong about that.

 

[bimble]

And one who hugs proponents of the scheme at a previous meeting.
Advised by one whose job could be on the line if it doesn't go through.

Who do you think most stands to loose their job?

 

[prunus]

What are you seeing here that I'm not? It says 23 locations have been surveyed for speed & volume during the closures. Not 71. 23. You think that some other sort of mysterious measuring was used at the missing 48?

I think he does think that, yes - just volume measuring. The simplest kind of rubber strip measuring just counts vehicles. The next level up measures the speed of each one as well - it's more complex and hence the kit is more expensive, hence it's not unlikely that more pure volume (which is after all the main measure of interest here) sites than combined sites would be used.

However, having said that - the original text in the link posted above is *highly* ambiguous as to how many sites are/were used before and/or during the active period - it's really not clear if it was 71 before and after, or just 23 (possibly 'key'?) after, possibly plus 6 video, or if the 23 and/or the 6 are a subset of the 71 with the others still active as just volume measures, or what. I don't think one can tell from that text.

 

[bimble]

I think he does think that, yes - just volume measuring. The simplest kind of rubber strip measuring just counts vehicles. The next level up measures the speed of each one as well - it's more complex and hence the kit is more expensive, hence it's not unlikely that more pure volume (which is after all the main measure of interest here) sites than combined sites would be used.

However, having said that - the original text in the link posted above is *highly* ambiguous as to how many sites are/were used before and/or during the active period - it's really not clear if it was 71 before and after, or just 23 (possibly 'key'?) after, possibly plus 6 video, or if the 23 and/or the 6 are a subset of the 71 with the others still active as just volume measures, or what. I don't think one can tell from that text.

Fair and reasonable as always, prunus.
Anybody who has noticed SINGLE RUBBER LINES across their street in the last few weeks please help us out & put your hand up!

More double sets of rubber lines on Fyfield St and Angell Park Gardens. I found this on the worldwideweb:

1 strip = monitoring traffic volume
2 strips = monitoring traffic volume and/or average speed
3 strips = speed enforcement (usually a car or van parked nearby with camera and/or Police)

But also, out of curiosity:
Where do you stand then, on whether this piece of work by the leader of the council which we are puzzling over is an example of someone who is just not very good at writing or whether it is actually quite a clever purposeful bit of obscurantism ?

 

[prunus]

Fair and reasonable as always, prunus.
Anybody who has noticed SINGLE RUBBER LINES across their street in the last few weeks please help us out & put your hand up!

But also, out of curiosity:
Where do you stand then, on whether this piece of work by the leader of the council which we are puzzling over is an example of someone who is just not very good at writing or whether it is actually quite a clever purposeful bit of obscurantism ?

Absolutely just bad writing. It reads like it was written hurriedly, and I suspect with a bunch of copy-and-pastes from other documents (hence some repetitive elements that don't quite gel - the bullet points in particular). It doesn't actually obscure anything, just leaves the answer in doubt - to obscure it it would have to leave us thinking we had the answer but in fact have the wrong one. And in any case it will all be out in the open in a few weeks, months at most, so what would be the point? They'd have to simultaneously be being darkly cunning and stupidly sloppy. That it's just the latter is much more likely. There is no conspiracy

Edited to remove a 'much' - too much hyperbole.