Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Right o the torygraph: the mouthpiece of a government which has decided anti environmentalism is its cause celebre in its latest manufactured culture war.

Funny how so many worldly people who just claim to care so much about poorer Londoners can do little but quote right wing gutter press 🤔

 

 

Sorry chicken, I forgot you need an unbiased report to believe anything 

Try 

BBC News - Newcastle city council to axe low traffic neighbourhood
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-66694402

Funny how so many worldly people who just claim to care so much just dis certain media outlets without bothering to read the story.

To misquote the Bible, before the rooster crows today, you will deny three times that you know the truth about LTNs 

 

Well Southwark LTNs were certainly not 'designed' - one only has to look at the implementation as a Covid-19 'LTN' put in place due to Tory led emergency powers - Southwark should have followed the example of Ealing and committed  to restoring local democracy by reverting to established processes of public consultation and removing all 'emergency' LTNs.

This should have included an assessment of the impact of any proposed LTNs on traffic levels on the main residential roads in the borough, both in terms of the well-being of the residents who live on them and the impact on public transport and emergency services.

So not designed...

5 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

Ex, isn't that the problem with most LTNs 

Badly designed ? 

No.

And if they are, the point is they can be easily tweaked and the trial can continue. What was actually needed in the Newcastle one was an expansion. It covered a couple of residential streets but still allowed rat-running down others so naturally everyone kept using it as a cut through and the opportunity to enable more active travel was never realised.

1 minute ago, heartblock said:

This should have included an assessment of the impact of any proposed LTNs on traffic levels on the main residential roads in the borough, both in terms of the well-being of the residents who live on them and the impact on public transport and emergency services.

So not designed...

They were designed and emergency services are a statutory consultee.

  • Like 1
1 minute ago, Spartacus said:

It's not working so let's expand it.

I was talking about that specific case. LTNs are specific to each circumstance - the basic principle works but how each one is implemented has a big effect.

It's why the Loughborough Junction attempt a few years ago failed dramatically, because it was one tiny intervention on its own with no complementary or supporting measures.

Don't worry Ex, keep swallowing the councils shilling whilst the rest of us suffer with the LTN failures 

1 hour ago, exdulwicher said:

The basic premise is that it was badly designed - classic case of not listening to the experts

Rewinding your conversation a bit, I thought that you had been banging the drum over the past 18 months about LTNs being designed by experts and people who knew better than the ordinary person in the Street. But now you appear to be saying they aren't. 

Interesting.

38 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

Don't worry Ex, keep swallowing the councils shilling whilst the rest of us suffer with the LTN failures 

Rewinding your conversation a bit, I thought that you had been banging the drum over the past 18 months about LTNs being designed by experts and people who knew better than the ordinary person in the Street. But now you appear to be saying they aren't. 

Interesting.

I'm talking about that specific case of the Newcastle one. 

It doesn't mean that all LTNs are bad or badly designed, we're referring to that specific one linked to in the news articles previously. 

Ah I see, and you also cited the Loughborough Junction attempt, maybe that wasn't designed by your expert too. What about the Wandsworth ones, again not designed by an expert? 

I'm smelling a pattern. 

Maybe, gulp, none of them have been designed by an expert because they were implemented in a hurry by council officers who hadn't implemented one before. 

  • Like 3

An emergency road closure is not design... 

When main residential roads and Red Routes controlled by TFL which carry over 30 per cent of all traffic, have more traffic deliberately forced onto them, the increased congestion and delay for local people is an issue. Naïve polling that points to big majorities favouring LTNs never ask follow-up questions about resulting congestion and delay.

Perhaps most significantly for long-standing Labour supporters, which I used to be - is that Southwark ignored the reality that LTNs primarily displace traffic from the roads of the prosperous to the roads of the poorer and more disadvantaged residents, consider the South Circular and Lordship Lane which already suffer from high levels of air pollution. The additional congestion and stalled traffic offer no alleviation. It is a policy that goes against all the principles of social justice.

 

Edited by heartblock
  • Like 2

Oh no another call for arms. 

The Beeb includes stories that they think will carry a bit of interest.  Whilst it should be objective based on the current news there is one on a failed LTN and none on successful traffic reduction schemes.   Therefore the Beeb is totally against LTNs.  I also see that they are fully in support of criminalising nitrous oxide use, carrying the government's line without any broader discussion on the downsides (in harm terms it's relatively minor, 'enjoyed' by 100,000s who could now get a criminal record).  Shame there isn't more on Scotland looking to ban disposable vapes which is now well down the Beeb pecking order.

Hmm, I'm just saying that one scheme that was cancelled, heralded by the right wing rags, and picked up by the Beeb isn't a sign that all LTNs are bad and that they will all be cancelled.

Looking forward to the time when this wont be news any more, sooner rather than later so we can put our energies towards more worthy matters.

So no I don't think that there is any fight. 

 

8 minutes ago, malumbu said:

Looking forward to the time when this wont be news any more, sooner rather than later so we can put our energies towards more worthy matters.

 

So are we, when LTNs are recognised as a general failure and removed. 

Nearly 2 years on and well past bedding in time yet our local one is still having massive negative impacts on surrounding streets local buses  and the south circular despite the council tinkering and adjusting it.

Face it Mal, the Dulwich Village LTN is badly designed, a general failure and needs a radical rethink otherwise this type of discussion will roll on and on. 

The council needs to engage properly with residents to design schemes that actually work and don't alienate large swathes of voters. 

What I see is a failure is the government not tackling air quality when they were ordered by the Supreme Court to sort this ASAP in 2015

What I see if a failure is the government not doing more to persuade the masses to reduce their personal motoring for environmental and health reasons

What I see as a failure is the government not explaining to the masses that from the early 10s new emission standards were not delivering the expected reductions in roadside NO2 and gently pushing those driving in mainly urban environments to move to small petrol cars, on the understanding that diesel still made best sense for those doing long A road and motorway journeys.

What I see as a failure is the Tories not backing their own policy (ie LTNs) and worse still Starmer and Sunak now competing who can be the best friend to the motorists.

What I applaud is the local authorities trying to do something about vehicle emissions, whether they have the ideal solution or not, they are having a go. 

 

19 minutes ago, malumbu said:

What I applaud is the local authorities trying to do something about vehicle emissions, whether they have the ideal solution or not, they are having a go. 

 

If only trying was good enough, what they have implemented has caused more congestion thus increasing emissions, not reduced them.

Square that circle off if you will, but by introducing something badly they've made the situation worse.  The heralded traffic evaporation just hasn't happened so more buses, lorries and cars are getting delayed pumping out more of the toxins you so badly want to reduce.  

  • Like 2

You mean the local data that many view as flawed/incomplete and therefore worthless.

The data that when challenged on its accuracy at a meeting with One Dulwich, Cllr McAsh promised to go away and investigate and let them know the findings.

Everyone is still waiting...

8 hours ago, march46 said:

The data shows a different story, as does my lived experience.

There has been no data published for over a year from Southwark and as it did not measure congestion or traffic travelling below a certain speed (often quoted as 10-20km/hr), only registering traffic that was free-flowing with ATCs placed in incorrect areas (near junctions).

My lived experience along with residents and bus users say different, as does TFL about our bus routes on residential red routes. It is a failed experiment, poorly designed.

The BBC reported Newcastle, but there is also Ealing and Tower Hamlets where LTNs were seen as flawed and creating congestion and pollution in the poorest communities. 

 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Latest Discussions

    • Granted Shoreditch is still London, but given that the council & organisers main argument for the festival is that it is a local event, for local people (to use your metaphor), there's surprisingly little to back this up. As Blah Blah informatively points out, this is now just a commercial venture with no local connection. Our park is regarded by them as an asset that they've paid to use & abuse. There's never been any details provided of where the attendees are from, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's never been any details provided of any increase in sales for local businesses, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's promises of "opportunities" for local people & traders to work at the festival, but, again, no figures to back this up. And lastly, the fee for the whole thing goes 100% to running the Events dept, and the dozens of free events that no-one seems able to identify, and, yes, you guessed it - no details provided for by the council. So again, no tangible benefit for the residents of the area.
    • I mean I hold no portfolio to defend Gala,  but I suspect that is their office.  I am a company director,  my home address is also not registered with Companies House. Also guys this is Peckham not Royston Vasey.  Shoreditch is a mere 20 mins away by train, it's not an offshore bolt hole in Luxembourg.
    • While it is good that GALA have withdrawn their application for a second weekend, local people and councillors will likely have the same fight on their hands for next year's event. In reading the consultation report, I noted the Council were putting the GALA event in the same light as all the other events that use the park, like the Circus, the Fair and even the FOPR fete. ALL of those events use the common, not the park, and cause nothing like the level of noise and/or disruption of the GALA event. Even the two day Irish Festival (for those that remember that one) was never as noisy as GALA. So there is some disingenuity and hypocrisy from the Council on this, something I wll point out in my response to the report. The other point to note was that in past years branches were cut back for the fencing. Last year the council promised no trees would be cut after pushback, but they seem to now be reverting to a position of 'only in agreement with the council's arbourist'. Is this more hypocrisy from 'green' Southwark who seem to once again be ok with defacing trees for a fence that is up for just days? The people who now own GALA don't live in this area. GALA as an event began in Brockwell Park. It then lost its place there to bigger events (that pesumably could pay Lambeth Council more). One of the then company directors lived on the Rye Hill Estate next to the park and that is likely how Peckham Rye came to be the new choice for the event. That person is no longer involved. Today's GALA company is not the same as the 'We Are the Fair' company that held that first event, not the same in scope, aim or culture. And therein lies the problem. It's not a local community led enterprise, but a commercial one, underwritten by a venture capital company. The same company co-run the Rally Event each year in Southwark Park, which btw is licensed as a one day event only. That does seem to be truer to the original 'We Are the Fair' vision, but how much of that is down to GALA as opoosed to 'Bird on the Wire' (the other group organising it) is hard to say.  For local people, it's three days of not being able to open windows, As someone said above, if a resident set up a PA in their back garden and subjected the neighbours to 10 hours of hard dance music every day for three days, the Council would take action. Do not underestimate how distressing that is for many local residents, many of whom are elderly, frail, young, vulnerable. They deserve more respect than is being shown by those who think it's no big deal. And just to be clear, GALA and the council do not consider there to be a breach of db level if the level is corrected within 15 minutes of the breach. In other words, while db levels are set as part of the noise management plan, there is an acknowledgement that a breach is ok if corrected within 15 minutes. That is just not good enough. Local councillors objected to the proposed extension. 75% of those that responded to the consultation locally did not want GALA 26 to take place at all. For me personally, any goodwill that had been built up through the various consultations over recent years was erased with that application for a second weekend, and especially given that when asked if there were plans for that in post 2025 event feedback meetings (following rumours), GALA lied and said there were no plans to expand. I have come to the conclusion that all the effort to appease on some things is merely an exercise in show, to get past the council's threshold for the events licence. They couldn't give a hoot in reality for local people, and people that genuinely care about parkland, don't litter it with noisy festivals either.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...