LTN Discussion

[Spartacus]

It was a blatant misrepresentation of the truth.

If he was Boris, you would be calling for him to resign by now.

The whole premise for not delaying the implementation is a lie as more people are impacted during the cost of living crisis than Khan claimed.

 

[rjsmall]

Hmm this is slightly awkward https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/07/01/low-traffic-neighbourhoods-anna-goodman-removes-poster-cctv/

[heartblock]

‘Impartial’ academic .... I’m not a fan of the Torygraph but you can’t head up ‘’research’ on traffic and pollution and say you are ‘impartial’ while doing this...also, strange behaviour?

 

[malumbu]

Total over-reaction.  Silly thing to do but it doesn't mean that her research is wrong.  Wont do her reputation any good but academics have to go through a peer review process before publishing.  As we all know. 

Here's some work she is doing on Covid: https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/support-the-ongoing-research-into-covid-19/

Perhaps the Mail and Torygraph have some footage of her wiping her bottom on some anti vaxing protest posters

She did work on earlier on HIV, immune response and the like.  I understand she lit a bonfire of DVDs produced by fundamental Christian groups protesting that HIV is a gay plague and against the will of God.

Someone else is clearly bias is Sue Gray.  She's a wokey lefty ex civil servant.  Typical of most civil servants.  She probably is not the biggest supporter of ex PM Johnson.  I expect she enjoyed the Spitting Image sketch with had miners singing "Maggie Maggie Maggie, OUT OUT OUT".  Her report on ex PM Johnson was therefore totally flawed as many people who do support ex PM Johnson have said.  Or maybe she was an impartial civil servant doing her job.  Like an impartial researcher doing their job.

[heartblock]

The 'research'  used differences in differences, which has been dropped by many researchers due to it falsely indicating  a 'trend' from very small differences in very small study populations.

The researchers chose this method, one has to wonder why. Using a more acceptable methodology would have not resulted in any significant differences in bike, pedestrian and car accidents in non-LTN London Boroughs compared to LTN Boroughs.

It wasn't peer reviewed.

Research doesn't have to go through peer review, unless it is published in a peer reviewed publication.

The poster was actually a local residents petition, already with 600+ signatures on.

 

[David Peckham]

Malumbu, the Dr Anna Goodman you cite regarding COVID is a clinician at Guy's.

The sneaky little sh!t in West Dulwich is someone quite different, based at The London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine.

[heartblock]

They are indeed two very different people, but I don't think such personal abuse is called for.

 

[ArmandHelpen1]

I find the vitriol around the LTNs so confusing.

Aren’t the closures aimed at making roads safer, reducing car journeys overall across the borough, which benefits all, but most of all our children and future generations? 

Why does mild inconvenience trump our children’s health and future? And why does the topic cause such fury?

Why aren’t people furious about climate change? Or at the very least, at those who still insist on unnecessary car travel which causes the traffic rather than the attempts to limit it?  

Or am I missing something?

Genuinely not trying to be inflammatory (so please keep replies respectful) but no matter how much I try to follow the arguments I can’t seem to join the dots. 

Please no nasty responses as I am only curious about why the issue causes the extent of anger that it does - When so many like me are the totally opposite picture and enjoy the reduced traffic that the LTNs have brought. 

I want the councillors to know there are many more like me who only see the benefits and are immensely grateful we can walk our children to school without the snarling traffic and beeping horns and screaming and fumes that used to exist before. I would personally be devastated if that returned. 

The problem with the vitriol is that people who share this opinion (many are parents) do not want to antagonise our community by putting our head above the parapet - especially as we are too busy working or looking after children to make the council meetings to show support. 
 

It makes it then seem that this is a scheme that has been ‘done’ to the people without support-  but many people do support LTNs and can’t be seen to agree with it for fear of upsetting those who are so emotionally invested. 
 

Really not intending to cause anger or upset, just to ask questions and provide some balance and a reminder it’s not just the loudest voices that should be heard. 
 
 

[first mate]

I think people on both sides of the argument are busy and unable to attend meetings. Many of those people also have children but they live on the streets that are suffering displaced traffic and the negative effects of LTNs.

Many residents oppose LTN's because they increase pollution on their streets. Clearly if you live in an LTN there is a stronger chance you are going to like it, humans are naturally quite selfish in seeking the best for their own, even if it is at the expense of others. That said, even those living within them see how unjust and inequitable they are and oppose them. Given the 'selfish gene' element, I really do not see that parents or non parents on either side of the debate are any more or less community-minded.
 

 

[Penguin68]

2 hours ago, first mate said:

Clearly if you live in an LTN there is a stronger chance you are going to like it, humans are naturally quite selfish in seeking the best for their own, even if it is at the expense of others.

Although I believe, when asked, that a majority of those in the Dulwich LTNs did actually oppose them. As well of those in the surrounding roads. But of course, it wasn't a referendum, just a 'consultation' which didn't come up with the 'right' answer.

[ArmandHelpen1]

7 hours ago, first mate said:

I think people on both sides of the argument are busy and unable to attend meetings. Many of those people also have children but they live on the streets that are suffering displaced traffic and the negative effects of LTNs.

Many residents oppose LTN's because they increase pollution on their streets. Clearly if you live in an LTN there is a stronger chance you are going to like it, humans are naturally quite selfish in seeking the best for their own, even if it is at the expense of others. That said, even those living within them see how unjust and inequitable they are and oppose them. Given the 'selfish gene' element, I really do not see that parents or non parents on either side of the debate are any more or less community-minded.
 

 

I have  lived on a road where displaced traffic is said to be an issue, but Interestingly I actually see the most anger towards LTNs coming from those living in them as they dislike the limits it places on driving through them and the increased time to their journey. 

I had read that recent study from Uni of Westminster that said the traffic displacement argument did not actually bear out in reality. I wonder if this research has been discussed here already ? Do people disagree with the findings ?

I’m Not for one second suggesting it’s only parents that are pro LTN, it’s more that there’s a large number of people who cannot attend the meetings (for various reasons) and who also may wish to voice their support but feel nervous to do so in public because it’s such an emotive topic

I wouldn’t want the councillors to read forums like this with so much vitriol circulating and not think that there is also plenty of quiet support that may be being drowned out through some of the noise. 
 

 

Edited July 24, 2023 by ArmandHelpen1

[Bicknell]

local ltns displace traffic onto boundary roads

delay buses eg on croxted rd, 

more traffic + pollution on roads with schools eg east duwlich grove

more miles driven

delay carers, gps, nurses etc (eg cant go through Dulwich village junction),

people who cant cycle (eg elderly or with disabilies) need other ways to travel  if roads blocked -  but public trnasport not great

good for kids on quiet roads, bad for kids on busy roads

 

[Spartacus]

1 hour ago, ArmandHelpen1 said:

I had read that recent study from Uni of Westminster that said the traffic displacement argument did not actually bear out in reality. I wonder if this research has been discussed here already ? Do people disagree with the findings ?

I would suggest reading back through this thread and others on the subject. The report has been discussed and the feeling is that it doesn't match with experience locally.

1 hour ago, ArmandHelpen1 said:

I wouldn’t want the councillors to read forums like this with so much vitriol circulating and not think that there is also plenty of quiet support that may be being drowned out through some of the noise. 

Don't worry, they don't, James McAsh did start a thread on here but ran away quickly when he realised it was safer in the southwark ivory tower 😉 

[Bic Basher]

For me, the Dulwich LTNs are about moving traffic from middle class streets onto already capacity full main roads of which are more likely to have residents who are likely to be poorer, so they get the brunt of the pollution from motor vehicles.

East Dulwich Grove, Lordship Lane/Dulwich Common triangle and Croxted Road all have social housing on those boundary roads which have residents who are likely to be in low paid jobs or Universal Credit over the roads which are inside the LTN.

[mr.chicken]

1 hour ago, ArmandHelpen1 said:

I’m Not for one second suggesting it’s only parents that are pro LTN,

I'm a non parent pro LTN person. To me, LTNs have opened up the local area in a way which it just wasn't open before. I've lived in London on and off a long time and have seen traffic levels go up and up and this made getting around by bike more and more dangerous to the point where I gave up on it about a decade ago.

The buses aren't amazing round here and they were often stuck in heavy traffic before the LTNs.

Now I have other options, and have started seeing how various routes are on lime bikes. It feels safe and accessible again on the roads in a way it hasn't in a very long time. I've now been as far afield as Clapham Junction and I got there faster than the bus, plus with no waiting time.

The low traffic roads and signposted cycle routes are really good.

 

[Bic Basher]

The summer months have seen an increase in people using bikes (or hired e-bikes) on the LTN roads, but in the autumn/winter when it gets dark earlier and is colder, sometimes I feel like I'm the only person bar professional riders and commuters who use the streets on LTNs who then revert to public transport or the car as it's warmer.

I was still using rental bikes in December/January especially in the early evening when it's dark which takes a different skill to those who do it for leisure in the summer because I still find the bike easier to travel across ED than waiting for a bus which can still take forever to get from DKH to the end of LL.

[ArmandHelpen1]

On 24/07/2023 at 22:27, mr.chicken said:

I'm a non parent pro LTN person. To me, LTNs have opened up the local area in a way which it just wasn't open before. I've lived in London on and off a long time and have seen traffic levels go up and up and this made getting around by bike more and more dangerous to the point where I gave up on it about a decade ago.

The buses aren't amazing round here and they were often stuck in heavy traffic before the LTNs.

Now I have other options, and have started seeing how various routes are on lime bikes. It feels safe and accessible again on the roads in a way it hasn't in a very long time. I've now been as far afield as Clapham Junction and I got there faster than the bus, plus with no waiting time.

The low traffic roads and signposted cycle routes are really good.

 

That’s so great - yes I’d love if more of London followed suit so I could more confidently cycle. 
 

It has definitely boosted how much I use local businesses too - the ability to pop in to the local shops as I walk past makes it much more likely, and more pleasant to do so.  

[mr.chicken]

7 hours ago, ArmandHelpen1 said:

That’s so great - yes I’d love if more of London followed suit so I could more confidently cycle.

I haven't found any especially good resources for planning routes, unfortunately. I've usually found I can modify the routes making them a bit longer to avoid heavy traffic sections in areas I know.

[Rockets]

There used to be a really good one and I have no idea what happened to it as it used to plot really good cycling routes, it was long before all the cycle super highways so may have been closed down but it was brilliant. 

[mr.chicken]

This is the kind of bold thinking we need in London with LTNs to make a real difference:

 

 

[first mate]

On 24/07/2023 at 23:25, Bic Basher said:

The summer months have seen an increase in people using bikes (or hired e-bikes) on the LTN roads, but in the autumn/winter when it gets dark earlier and is colder, sometimes I feel like I'm the only person bar professional riders and commuters who use the streets on LTNs who then revert to public transport or the car as it's warmer.

I was still using rental bikes in December/January especially in the early evening when it's dark which takes a different skill to those who do it for leisure in the summer because I still find the bike easier to travel across ED than waiting for a bus which can still take forever to get from DKH to the end of LL.

It will be interesting to see what happens this winter. It felt like there was a big downturn in cycling last year, once the weather turned. On the plus side, perhaps there will be fewer Lime bikes just lying around.

[Rockets]

3 hours ago, mr.chicken said:

This is the kind of bold thinking we need in London with LTNs to make a real difference:

 

 

Is it Amsterdam or Berlin that just banned bikes from parts of the city centre due to problems they cause?

[mr.chicken]

1 hour ago, Rockets said:

Is it Amsterdam or Berlin that just banned bikes from parts of the city centre due to problems they cause?

Neither. That's a made up fact.  I'll sure you can dig up an article which supports half the claim though 😉

 

 

 

[Spartacus]

1 hour ago, Rockets said:

Is it Amsterdam or Berlin that just banned bikes from parts of the city centre due to problems they cause?

It was Paris banning eScooters back in April. Fact not made up 🤔

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/02/parisians-vote-on-banning-e-scooters-from-french-capital#:~:text=Paris has almost 15%2C000 e,thrown into the River Seine.

 

[mr.chicken]

3 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

It was Paris banning eScooters back in April. Fact not made up 🤔

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/02/parisians-vote-on-banning-e-scooters-from-french-capital#:~:text=Paris has almost 15%2C000 e,thrown into the River Seine.

 

Also a made up fact. It's legal to own and operate an electric scooter in Paris. As usual the link says something different from what you claim.