-
-
Latest Discussions
-
By Earl Aelfheah · Posted
LTNs were pushed by the Conservative government (as was ULEZ which you also disapprove of). They were one of several active travel measures which were encouraged as a condition of the TFL funding settlement post Covid. £69m of direct borough funding (per year) was also provided to support more localised investment in walking and cycling schemes across the city. At the time Grant Shapps said: “Any cycle schemes implemented or supported under this funding shall be fully compliant with LTN 1/20 cycle infrastructure design guidance.” …but we all know schnapps is a secret commie 🤣 I’ve no idea. I do know that people are covering their plates and driving through and that’s probably an accident waiting to happen (although clearly down to signage 🤣). The emergency services have agreed the changes, so I would assume that on balance they think it’s the right move. Whilst ‘One’ are suggesting the emergency services have agreed the changes under pressure, they wont say what sort of pressure, or from who 🤔. Perhaps it’s the commies again 🤣😂 -
A bit like this: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/27/tory-staff-running-network-of-anti-ulez-facebook-groups-riddled-with-racism-and-abuse -
Because the council responsible for it is far-left.... And you haven't answered whether it is worth diverting emergency vehicles because a few cars drive through the LTN and why some lobby groups have been so desperate to close it to emergency vehicles. Emergency services hate non-permeable junctions as they lengthen response times....f you remember it's why the council had to redesign the DV junction because emergency services kept telling them they needed to be able to drive through it...but the council resisted and resisted until they finally relented because the emergency services said their LTN had increased response times....sorry if the truth gets in the way of a good story but those are facts. The council was putting lives at risk because they refused to open the junction to emergency services. Why? What could have been the motivation for that? So, in fact, it was the emergency services who forced the council (kicking and screaming) to remove the permanent barriers and allow emergency services access. So the council finally opened the junction to emergency services and is now coming back to re-close part of the junction. Why? Perhaps you should be asking who is lobbying the council to close the junction or parts of it or why the council is happy to waste so much of our money on it - who are they representing as even their own consultation demonstrated they did not have support from the local community for the measures? The results showed the majority of local residents were against the measure...but they are going ahead with them anyway. In time, I am sure the truth will come to light and those rewponsbile will be held accountable but you have to admit there is something very unusual going on with that junction - its the very definition of a (very expensive) white elephant. -
-
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now