Sillyseason

jamesmcash Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Equity and LTNs > It is true that main roads do not benefit from > LTNs in the same way that side streets do. But it > is not true that poorer people are more likely to > live on main roads. In fact, the opposite is true: > 4.5% of households with an income below ?20k live > on main roads compared to 5.8% of middle-income > and 4.6% of high income households. Black and > white people are equally likely to live on a main > road (4.9% each), with asian people slightly less > likely to and Arab, Mixed and Other more likely > to. If you have a disability that limits travel, > you are slightly less likely to live on a main > road than those who do not. Just to add to this the Southwark?s Streetspace Plan in response to TfL?s London Streetspace Plan 14 July 2020 states KEY ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION 16. The key issue is that social distancing has greatly reduced public transport capacity (to 13-15%, TfL 11 May 2020) and to therefore avoid a significant increase in driving the borough needs to enable a substantial modal change to Active Travel modes and to discourage private motor vehicles from returning. This is required to discourage higher levels of driving than before the lockdown, which will increase congestion and pollution and create greater impacts for everyone, especially our most vulnerable communities which tend to live on busier and more polluted streets. So Mr McAsh seems to be disagreeing with his own councils observations and one of the reasons given for desire for modal shift in the first place. It is curious as it identifies congestion and pollution as being a potential problem and who it impacts the most, yet this is a problem exacerbated by the LTNs...

@James - re the below data on populations and the study you linked to. Afraid it is not correct and it wouldn't be good to mislead people. See here: The Tweeter who has delved into the raw data used in the study you linked actually shows that in Greater London - BAME are 26.9% more likely to love in main roads than white, Black 13.7, Asian 31.5%, Mixed other & Arab 44.3%. Inner London BAME 13.1% more likely, Outer London 36%. He has posted the raw data tables. You can't help quoting from poor sources, so we won't blame you, but as someone who has written in the past that he cares about the social justice argument around LTNs and if they don't benefit the majority he would be keen to adjust/remove it is important to get the facts right and so everyone is very clear on who is benefitting and who is not. It is also worth mentioning that one of the local Cllrs said that no EqIAs were done on any of these LTNs so there has been no assessment whatsover of who is impacted, not consulted with any local elderly or disabled groups and as far as we can see or have read on here have done nothing to engage with any since, so it is a bit much to try and play down impacts on any groups you bring up, when you simply have no clue. It is weird that all we ever hear from Cllrs is playing down of obvious problems, with emergency services, with congestion, now with disabled, with BAME, with local businesses. Who I understand have stated on Twitter that they are definitely and only moving because of the road closures on Melbourne Grove, which you didn't mention in your summary. It's almost as if you and perhaps other local Cllrs have already made their minds up what the outcome of the review will be before it has even started. Which is a bit of a turnaround from things you were posting last year. Why have you changed your position?