LTN Discussion

[Rockets]

kissthisguy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Unbelievable. Authoritarian and lacking in

> confidence - it's not the thing you do when you've

> won the argument!

>

> I hope it is challenged. Very Big Brother.

Another example of a council forgetting to engage brain before pressing send. It is utterly ludicrous that they thought it appropriate to send this - it sends such a bad signal (but is very reflective of the way many councils have handled themselves during the LTN debacles).

Let's hope Southwark isn't so stupid to pull the same trick - people have had enough problems with pro-LTN folks damaging them that they don't need the council wading in too.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

Moovart Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I believe it's to do with laws on advertising

> boards, same way estate agents have to take their

> signs down within a certain time when a property

> is sold.

It's exactly this - zooming in on the letter shows the advertising regulations cited. The estate agent boards have been up for a year or so.

[Rockets]

Did anyone else see the news last night with Sadiq in the Waltham Forest LTN as he talked about the continued use of cars in London and that the walking, cycling and public transport share has fallen whilst car use has increased?

It was on the back of this announcement:

https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/mayoral/cost-of-congestion-in-capital-revealed

I couldn't help but watch it and think that it felt like an admission that the current policies being introduced across the capital are just not working - they are just not having the desired impact (and may actually be contributing to many of the issues highlighted by Sadiq).

So what do we need, more of the same or a radical rethink of London's approach to travel? Maybe now is the time for the Mayor to admit (and he did do this during the BBD interview) that motorised vehicular travel is not going to go away and that we have to accept that and try to put policies in place to reduce journeys (road pricing) and clean those modes of travel away from fossil fuel towards electric.

[DuncanW]

Could it possibly be a combination of factors?

Including... that a large number of office workers, who are most likely to cycle-commute, are not going to their offices as frequently.

People are choosing to drive for journeys where they may previously have used public transport, but feel safer (from Covid) in their own personal space.

Online shopping has been increasing for years but has accelerated during Covid times meaning more delivery vans on the road.

Motorised vehicular traffic isn't going to go away completely, no-one is saying that. But we need to be trying to reduce it...

[exdulwicher]

I couldn't help but watch it and think that it felt like an admission that the current policies being introduced across the capital are just not working - they are just not having the desired impact (and may actually be contributing to many of the issues highlighted by Sadiq).

Think how much worse it would have been if there hadn't been some (relatively minor) efforts to curb vehicle use.

Our current Government, in between having lockdown parties and handing out lucrative contracts to all their mates, did manage to realise that post-Covid, there would be a dramatic shift away from public transport due to concerns around crowded spaces although maybe they did not predict the ongoing shift to WFH where possible.

The efforts to prevent that mass shift towards private vehicle use and promote active travel have had SOME effect albeit it's taking some time to filter through, there's still shifting goalposts around "return to the office" that's having an effect. The key thing is that most of the measures have gone in with a broad degree of collaboration between boroughs (certain notable exceptions like Wandsworth and RBKC notwithstanding) which has been far better than them going in piecemeal or without any other measures (like the previously quoted Loughborough Junction which, as a standalone scheme was never going to work without significant other interventions in that location).

The answer - counter-intuitive though it might sound - is to go for more restrictions. Make walking and cycling safer and more attractive, make driving/parking more difficult and (if possible) make public transport more attractive although that might require a fair bit more advertising and reassurance yet.

Currently we're in a bit of a limbo - the measures that have gone in have had a reasonable impact across the boroughs, the general picture looks about the same from all the LTNs across the various boroughs with a few isolated negatives (although generally trending -> positive). However some councils, possibly with an eye on May elections, are wavering under the onslaught of the noisy minority (and in spite of the "68% of respondents" and other such stuff, it IS a minority, it always is) and are trying to throw a few bones such as timed restrictions or unlimited access for taxis which basically just shifts people's habits to "oh well I'll drive earlier or later", it doesn't shift them away from driving. It's also quite confusing - there's the potential to simply follow the car in front through a bus gate without necessarily realising that the car in front is Blue Badge or a taxi and exempt and then end up being fined. That generally upsets people - even if the argument is simply "you're a driver, you should be able to read and understand road signs, not just blindly follow the car in front". If you want more buy in, it's actually better to have more restrictions.

Doesn't help much that the Government's Transport Decarbonisation Plan makes no mention of reducing vehicle mileage, instead relying on the automobile industry to come up with cleaner / electric vehicles which, while it removes the pollution aspect from the roadside, it does nothing to alleviate congestion or road danger. In some respects, the Government, after introducing and funding the LTNs have largely left councils out to dry which is why some backtracked almost immediately which in turn has made it harder still to re-introduce any restrictions.

[Bic Basher]

I'd debate that residents in SE22 who live near to Forest Hill or Honor Oak Park station have the closest to a decent public transport service because they have tube like frequencies of trains, but it's still nowhere like north of the river where they have a frequent tube service covering most areas.

The bus service is nowhere as good because of other factors, the 20mph speed limit in Southwark first of all slowed bus journeys down and because the LTN now sends traffic that used to use Court Lane onto Lordship Lane, East Dulwich Grove and Dulwich Common, they get stuck in extra traffic jams.

It's common to wait over 20 minutes for a P4 to Lewisham in Dulwich Common because the bus gets stuck in the jam which was already bad before the LTN, but is even worse now.

While Dulwich has three rail stations, there are residents who also use Denmark Hill and Forest Hill who rely on buses to get there. With buses being slowed down thanks to Southwark's hair brained traffic calming schemes, it's much harder than before to reach those two stations. (Peckham Rye and HOP are also used, but not directly affected by the Dulwich LTN).

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

Bic Basher Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> the 20mph speed limit in Southwark

> first of all slowed bus journeys down...

> It's common to wait over 20 minutes for a P4 to

> Lewisham in Dulwich Common because the bus gets

> stuck in the jam which was already bad before the

> LTN, but is even worse now.

Any evidence for the claim that buses have been delayed by 20mph speed limits in Southwark? It's not like they were usually hammering up to 30mph in the 500 yards between bus stops.

If P4 buses were getting stuck in "the jam" (which one?), that would delay them but wouldn't affect the interval at which they arrived at any stop. The P4 does run at 20 minute intervals at some points in the day...

[legalalien]

Ex-D - I interpret your post as saying that because the Dulwich scheme doesn?t go far enough it can?t and won?t work - it has all the features you mention - timed (now reduced timed) closures, people rescheduling their journeys (with congestion before and after the timed closures), confused drivers following buses and each other through bus gates.

Can we agree the scheme is poorly designed, even though we teach that conclusion for different reasons, perhaps?

[ab29]

The buses have been delayed greatly ever since the TfL has introduced 'waiting to regulate' the service - infuriating and complete waste of time.

The bus frequency has also been reduced - this was done before Covid e.g. 176 and 35.

The buses get stuck in the traffic which has been worst since LTN e.g. on LL.

Direct trains from Forest Hill to London Bridge have now been suspended indefinitely.

[Rockets]

And what I can't work out is that every council that is putting these in is claiming tremendous success and reductions in traffic yet Sadiq is saying there has been no reduction in traffic. Granted he is talking across the whole of London but the numbers just aren't adding up.

I also think it is very telling that any reference made by the Mayor to modal shift increases is grounded on the 2020 lockdown increase - which was a temporary blip and has not continued in 2021.

He also says in his statement:

"Most traffic is caused simply by there being too great a demand for limited street space, meaning the only long-term solution can be to significantly reduce car use in favour of greener means of travel."

But by their very design LTNs and cycle lanes create more demand for limited street space so he is massively contradicting his own policy - his measures are adding to the problem - just look at Waterloo Bridge. He seems really confused and I am trying to work out what his strategic political point is - I do wonder if he is trying to put a marker down before the inevitable "your LTNs and cycle lanes are a waste of money" narrative once the 2021 modal shift numbers get released and show a massive drop.

Also the BBC news item article contained input from a lady who ran a flower shop within the Waltham Forest LTN who was saying how nice it was, due to the LTNs, that people could stand outside her shop without traffic outside and a man who said LTNs were awful as most of the shops had closed because nobody could get to them anymore. It was a wonderful poster child for all the narratives on both sides of the argument.

[Dan-the-man]

I'll comment briefly on the politics, being an active Labour member (just to note I'm pretty pro-LTNs).

Ultimately, one-party state/regimes always run into trouble.

A particular problem with Southwark Labour is the radicalism of local members combined with a situation where virtually anyone in a red rosette gets elected with big majorities.

This leads to a situation whereby ideological purity is required by anyone seeking to be selected by local Labour members.

In the 2018 elections, some very good moderate councillors were not selected again. Their sole crime was that they were not momentum activists, whilst some very underqualified candidates were selected and won with decent majorities.

Currently Labour is going through the process to select candidates for 2022 - I know from inside knowledge that pretty much anyone on the 'moderate' wing of the party has not even been shortlisted.

This means local parties will again primarily be choosing from a shortlist of momentum-approved left wing candidates.

Even as a Labour member for a long time (and desperate to remove this conservative government), I know I'll be voting for alternatives in the council elections (probably Lib Dems if they put forward anyone decent) just to try and ensure there is more balanced representation and to try and turf out some of the 2018 Labour contingent.

[ab29]

"Most traffic is caused simply by there being too great a demand for limited street space, meaning the only long-term solution can be to significantly reduce car use in favour of greener means of travel."

The question has to be this: what mode of transport is fairly environmentally friendly and can be used by/can transport large number of people quickly? The answer is public transport, such as trains and buses. And this should be the main focus.

Plenty of space has been taken away from buses (and pedestrians) to accommodate cycle lanes, even though there will always be a very small group of people using them. The lanes are empty most of the time, especially since Covid and the shift in the working patterns which I think is going to stay.

This pandering by politicians and councillors to those shouting loudest about the 'green schemes', often being a smoke screen covering the self interest is infuriating. No planning, no common sense, no vision whatsoever.

And for the record: I don't drive, have never owned a car, walk a lot and I'm against the LTN.

[Rockets]

Dan-the-man Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'll comment briefly on the politics, being an

> active Labour member (just to note I'm pretty

> pro-LTNs).

>

> Ultimately, one-party state/regimes always run

> into trouble.

>

> A particular problem with Southwark Labour is the

> radicalism of local members combined with a

> situation where virtually anyone in a red rosette

> gets elected with big majorities.

>

> This leads to a situation whereby ideological

> purity is required by anyone seeking to be

> selected by local Labour members.

>

> In the 2018 elections, some very good moderate

> councillors were not selected again. Their sole

> crime was that they were not momentum activists,

> whilst some very underqualified candidates were

> selected and won with decent majorities.

>

> Currently Labour is going through the process to

> select candidates for 2022 - I know from inside

> knowledge that pretty much anyone on the

> 'moderate' wing of the party has not even been

> shortlisted.

>

> This means local parties will again primarily be

> choosing from a shortlist of momentum-approved

> left wing candidates.

>

> Even as a Labour member for a long time (and

> desperate to remove this conservative government),

> I know I'll be voting for alternatives in the

> council elections (probably Lib Dems if they put

> forward anyone decent) just to try and ensure

> there is more balanced representation and to try

> and turf out some of the 2018 Labour contingent.

Dan and, as we painfully found during the 2019 election, this will ultimately lead to their downfall. Labour has to learn from the mistakes under Corbyn - granted local politics is a different beast to national politics but hard left ideology led to an election disaster.

I think Labour are in for a rough ride in some wards in the area (and beyond if you look at the in-fill and Leo Pollack issues - speaking of which I saw this - again not a good look https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/southwark-council-takes-no-further-action-against-former-housing-chief-leo-pollak/) and ultimately Cllr Williams will be held to account at Labour HQ.

The LTNs could be the beginning of the Red Wall of Southwark starting to crumble.

[legalalien]

See attached message from Cllr McAsh in this month?s SE22 mag.

Interesting re Labour selection etc. Can someone explain the political leanings of those who are ?Labour and Cooperative? members in two or three sentences? I?ve read the history of the alliance but still not sure what it means in practical terms.

[legalalien]

Overview and Scrutiny meeting tonight - Cllr Rose unable to attend (to be interviewed re her portfolio) as unwell. Cllr Burgess apparently decided not to come either as her portfolio is closely related - apparently an email sent to committee members late yesterday to that effect and no objection. Cllr Chamberlain suggested that was very late notice, he hadn?t been aware and that Cllr Burgess? clean air portfolio was an important stand alone issue that he?d have liked to ask questions on. She wasn?t there (chair says she was unavailable anyway) so seems is postponed to an unspecified future date. One way of avoiding scrutiny I guess. Similarly,the committee is only now approving minutes from 3 March last year when most of the current committee members weren?t even there - that?s how far behind the minutes are. Again LDs expressing concern.

[Dan-the-man]

Re politics of local councillors:

Dulwich Village

Richard Leeming - moderate

Margy Newens - not sure, think pretty leftwards.

Champion Hill

Peter John- moderate, standing down.

Sarah King - moderate but a bit of an EU ultra

Dulwich Hill

Maggie Browning - soft-left, roughly the centre of the labour party (i.e. not a Blairite, but not a Corbynite either, roughly half-way between those two extremes).

Jon Hartley - likewise (I think).

Goose Green

McAsh - ultra-left - see the 'fxxx the tories' t-shirt.

Victoria Olisa - fairly left wing but don't think quite at the McAsh level.

Charlie Smith- I think fairly mainstream/old-school centre-left but can't be sure

[legalalien]

At least we didn?t have that Philip Normal chap who has just resigned as a Lambeth councillor.

https://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2022/01/philip-normal-resigns-as-lambeth-councillor-after-shocking-social-media-posts-revealed/amp/. The Oval ward has an LTN, but is now down two out of three councillors as apparently one of the others is missing in action.

New cycle hangar going in on Cornflower Terrace:

https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?Id=7540

[kissthisguy]

@dan-the-man really interesting picture you paint of the local political dynamics. I'm amazed that the hard to hardish left has such influence still. I'd just assumed that it would be on the wane post-Corbyn. You say selections are happening, so do you know if Labour are going with James, Charlie, Victoria, Margy and Richard and just haven't announced it yet? If Richard is a moderate how can he squeeze through? I think you're right about Margy being left leaning - her twitter bio says she is a Socialist-environmentalist

[kissthisguy]

Ok so James McAsh's tweet earlier today

does speak to a deep factional rift. But it sounds as if (from his complaint about unequal treatment of Ben Wiedel-Kaufmann and Philip Normal) Lambeth is a moderate controlled council? But in southwark it's Momentum / left controlled? Or at least that's who'll be on the ballot paper in the elecitons this year?

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

There's oftwn an inverse relationship between the states and the bile so local politics can be savage (as this thread shows).

Coincidentally the Tories have just announced their candidates and their policies are as follows:

1) LTNs are bad

2) LTNs are bad

3) Labour is bad because of the LTNs

https://www.dwnconservatives.com/news/dulwich-conservatives-announce-candidates-dulwich-village-ward

So whoever wanted their single issue candidates here they are. Interesting also that one of them was also the driving force (no pun intended) behind the recently-formed "Dulwich Alliance" and the "Dulwich Village, College Road and Woodyard Lane Residents Association", both of which have been issuing statements against LTNs.

[Rockets]

kissthisguy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> @dan-the-man really interesting picture you paint

> of the local political dynamics. I'm amazed that

> the hard to hardish left has such influence still.

> I'd just assumed that it would be on the wane

> post-Corbyn. You say selections are happening, so

> do you know if Labour are going with James,

> Charlie, Victoria, Margy and Richard and just

> haven't announced it yet? If Richard is a moderate

> how can he squeeze through? I think you're right

> about Margy being left leaning - her twitter bio

> says she is a Socialist-environmentalist

If I remember rightly her twitter bio used to say ex-city trader??

[Rockets]

legalalien Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> At least we didn?t have that Philip Normal chap

> who has just resigned as a Lambeth councillor.

>

> https://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2022/01/philip-normal-

> resigns-as-lambeth-councillor-after-shocking-socia

> l-media-posts-revealed/amp/. The Oval ward has an

> LTN, but is now down two out of three councillors

> as apparently one of the others is missing in

> action.

>

> New cycle hangar going in on Cornflower Terrace:

>

> https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetai

> ls.aspx?Id=7540

Did no one in the Labour Party do any due diligence on the social feeds of their candidates? Those tweets from Philip Normal are disgraceful- and it?s not just one or two.

On the Tory candidates it is interesting, but not surprising, they are running on an anti-LTN agenda. One Dulwich has stated from the beginning that they were not politically motivated and I always wondered why Dulwich Alliance came to fruition and I wonder whether Clive wanted to launch a political career. It?s going to be very interesting to see what happens between now and May.

[kissthisguy]

Rockets:

If I remember rightly her twitter bio used to say ex-city trader??

Really?! If @Dan-the-man is right about the left holding sway, no wonder she changed it. On a more serious note that's quite a rough and tumble game - requires resilience. Agree with you that the Philip Normal tweets were appalling.

I suspect it's Occam's Razor re the DA: it came to fruition to fight the closures rather than being a roundabout way of an individual starting a career. But who knows.

[heartblock]

I'm not a member of the DA but I know two Labour Party members who are - so this isn't about political party's. I have voted Labour since I was able to vote, with a few Green votes dependent on how irritated I have been on the national LP policies.

In the local elections I intend to vote for a candidate who recognises that the traffic and pollution on the road I have lived on for 30+ years, so called ED Central - is significantly and dangerously elevated since roads were closed in 6 very wealthy areas.

The idling and congested traffic during the time hundreds of young children were walking to school was horrific yesterday on ED Grove - no one with any sense can witness this and then say the data shows a drop in congestion and traffic on ED Grove - except of course the Council continuing to gaslight us residents with their weirdly collated and invented data.

Today London is on a high pollution alert - what does this mean? The idling and congested traffic on ED Grove, stretching from LL to DV - which you can go witness right now at 08:10 will not be removed by air currents, but will instead stay at a child's height so that they will breath in significant amounts of pollutants.

Ella's death was partly caused by a high pollution event due to congested traffic from the South Circular - which runs through Dulwich, which triggered a fatal asthmatic attack.

Hopefully nobody suffers an equal fate walking down ED Grove while idling traffic belches out these pollutants today.

[heartblock]

https://www.blf.org.uk/taskforce/data-tracker/air-quality/pm25

The Taskforce for Lung Health