LTN Discussion

[Penguin68]

2 hours ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

I took a look at the road causality and collision data around the Calton Road / village road junction. In the 3 years leading up to the introduction of the filter / LTN, there were 6 collisions. In the 3 years following it's introduction, there was 1.

As has been noted, I think, elsewhere, collisions between cyclists and pedestrians are less likely to be recorded, unless serious injury or death is the consequence. There being no vehicles from one direction is definitely going to reduce the opportunity for collision of motor vehicles.

Indeed, and in general, removing or reducing the number of motor vehicles anywhere is going, necessarily, to reduce both collisions and air pollution in the areas being controlled  (my emphasis). The moot point is whether these are an overall reduction or simply a shift to an outlying area. Of both air quality issues and incidents. No way of knowing, ever, whether a collision which didn't take place at the Calton Road / village road junction did take place somewhere else, of course, but the air quality issue is at least measurable, were anyone to be bothered to measure it, and whether anyone had taken appropriate and comparable 'pre' measures (they didn't).

[Earl Aelfheah]

3 hours ago, Penguin68 said:

Indeed, and in general, removing or reducing the number of motor vehicles anywhere is going, necessarily, to reduce both collisions and air pollution in the areas being controlled  

Rockets (and others I believe) suggested that removing motor vehicles increased the danger, because congestion brings 'order and increases safety'

But yes, I agree that removing motor vehicles reduces collisions, and the data confirms this.

[Rockets]

Earl you're misrepresenting what I was saying...again....tsk tsk. Of course, if you remove cars then the danger from cars reduces - you don't have to be a rocket scientist to work that part out.

What takes a little more grey matter is to work out that when there was slow moving congested traffic then the risk to pedestrians was low. Remove the vehicles and replace them with fast moving bikes and try to mix them in a highly pedestrianised area then the risk to pedestrians will be higher. Is that clearer now?

[Earl Aelfheah]

But the number of collisions involving pedestrians hasn't increased. It has done the opposite. 

And once more, your inability to comprehend that it is not just speed that effect impact forces and associated risk, but the interaction of speed and weight is slightly ridiculous.

20 minutes ago, Rockets said:

Earl you're misrepresenting what I was saying...again....tsk tsk.

I absolutely was not. You said 

Quote

 

I would argue with you that for pedestrians that junction is now more dangerous than it was when it was open to cars.

...If anyone bothered to monitor it I bet you there would be far more cycle vs pedestrians incidents in that area now than car vs pedestrian indicents when it was open to cars.

 

 

It is monitored and it is not more dangerous

Edited February 7 by Earl Aelfheah

[first mate]

14 hours ago, Rockets said:

when there was slow moving congested traffic then the risk to pedestrians was low. Remove the vehicles and replace them with fast moving bikes and try to mix them in a highly pedestrianised area then the risk to pedestrians will be higher. Is that clearer now?

Do we know if cycling impacts in pedestrianised areas, like pavements etc is being monitored?

[malumbu]

You could set up a local neighbourhood cycle watch, this would be similar to local speed watches, speak to the community police at their next safer neighbourhood meeting. 

I wont be joining you but I am serious about talking to the police if you believe this to be a such a major safety issue

I did a parking watch outside a local school for a week, which the police supported.  It deterred unsafe parking, and for some they stopped doing it after the end of the watch.

[first mate]

I take it this is not being monitored then? How odd, given the rollout of e-bike TMOs , all over the borough. If you conduct experimental, large scale changes to the environment, surely you should monitor for negative as well as positive impacts?

[Penguin68]

55 minutes ago, first mate said:

, surely you should monitor for negative as well as positive impacts?

Not if you're only interested in any positive impacts. Southwark Council is very much a political entity, to consider it won't politic is somewhat naive. 

[malumbu]

I have no idea if it is being monitored and I don't care.  If loads of pedestrians were being hurt I would expect action from the police and Southwark.  Is this happening?  I don't think so or else I would have heard about it.

As you are concerned I have suggested that there is something you can practically do.  

[Rockets]

1 hour ago, malumbu said:

I have no idea if it is being monitored and I don't care. 

Of course you don't.

[malumbu]

Why should I?  It doesn't bother me both as a pedestrian and cyclist using the square.  If it bothers you set up a neighbourhood cycle watch.  Action not words.

[Rockets]

2 hours ago, first mate said:

I take it this is not being monitored then?

I don't think it is. One of the criticisms from a man whose wife was killed by a cyclist that the reporting of such incidents was insufficient. I would be interested to know how Earl's shared data is collected - is it from police sources, ambulance, hospital data.

There seems to be a lack of reliable data on cyclist vs pedestrian accidents. I saw one journalist say that injuries had increased significantly since Covid (I think they said doubled) but they did not cite a source for that but suggested it came from the NHS. 

Maybe it is time for data to be robustly collected.

Edited February 8 by Rockets

[first mate]

2 hours ago, malumbu said:

Why should I?  It doesn't bother me both as a pedestrian and cyclist using the square.  If it bothers you set up a neighbourhood cycle watch.  Action not words.

Weren't you describing the number of near misses and, I think, one impact you had with various pedestrians, while you were cycling? 

[malumbu]

??? my near misses have been on roads when pedestrians walk out in front of me. I have learned to tell when pedestrians are not looking so I can either brake, swerve, shout cheery warnings, or not so cheery warnings.

It's the same as when I know that a driver is on their phone, or going to turn without indicating.  It's because I am a courteous and safe cyclist, driver, motorcyclist and pedestrian.  I recommend this to all road users.

[first mate]

I believe that it is up to the council to monitor impacts of wholesale and expensive environmental changes they have introduced, without mandate.

[malumbu]

Well if they don't why not step up?  I believe it for the police to enforce speed limits but if local community groups want to do similar I have no issues.  Surely there is enough of you who are very angry who could get together.

[first mate]

I think they will probably have to, at some point.

Even so, your somewhat disingenuous response should be called out for what it is. You would dismiss any data collected by those you view as anti cycling, and label it as coming from a place of "anger", as subjective or even a figment of the collective imagination. So no, I'll reject your suggestion, which is not genuine and a further example of your consistent deflection.

Council data is what we need.

Edited February 9 by first mate

[Earl Aelfheah]

On 08/02/2025 at 13:37, Rockets said:

I would be interested to know how Earl's shared data is collected - is it from police sources, ambulance, hospital data.

There seems to be a lack of reliable data on cyclist vs pedestrian accidents. I saw one journalist say that injuries had increased significantly since Covid (I think they said doubled) but they did not cite a source for that but suggested it came from the NHS. 

Maybe it is time for data to be robustly collected.

It's not my data. It's tfl data.

This constant innuendo is so tedious. The 'I'm just asking questions' rhetorical tactic (often employed by people like Farage) is obviously disingenuous. You could email tfl and they would tell you. The problem of course, is that then you would have the answer. Better to insinuate something that fits your prejudice than to know and risk being proven wrong eh?

How can you ask for more robust data to be collected, when you have no interest in how robust the detailed data you already have is? The truth is you're not interested in objective data, except in so far as it might prove something you already believe.  

[Rockets]

2 hours ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

How can you ask for more robust data to be collected, when you have no interest in how robust the detailed data you already have is? The truth is you're not interested in objective data, except in so far as it might prove something you already believe.  

No I am keen to know if you know the source and scope of the data you share. You clearly don't. 

 

On 07/02/2025 at 17:54, Earl Aelfheah said:

But the number of collisions involving pedestrians hasn't increased. It has done the opposite. 

You make claims like this without understanding the source of the info and whether it is a truly accurate reflection of what is happening. You've done the same on the other thread; shared a stat that you think backs your claims but you haven't done any due diligence on the data before pressing post.

Edited February 11 by Rockets

[teddyboy23]

The west dulwich action group .are taking lambeth council to court tomorrow 12th Feb 2025.over the placement of ltns.in parts of dulwich. £50 million in fines.more congestion on boundary rds.1000s of school children affected. Telegraph reports

[Earl Aelfheah]

3 hours ago, Rockets said:

No I am keen to know if you know the source and scope of the data you share. You clearly don't. 

You make claims like this without understanding the source of the info and whether it is a truly accurate reflection of what is happening. You've done the same on the other thread; shared a stat that you think backs your claims but you haven't done any due diligence on the data before pressing post.

It literally says on the first page of the dashboard where the data is from. You haven't even looked at it (and again, I am not your secretary). Are you actually remotely interested in data, because all the evidence is that you're just interested in proving your prejudice (which is fine, but don't pretend to want 'more robust data', when you haven't even briefly looked at the detailed data already available).

You've made claims about increased collisions and road danger, with no evidence whatsoever.

I don't believe those arguments are made remotely in good faith.

Edited February 11 by Earl Aelfheah

[teddyboy23]

Lambeth councillors have been given a day off after the west dulwiich action group.confronted them over the ltns.in west dulwich.some of them were left in tears.west dulwich action group want the ltns removed.67% of residents plus some shops were against ltns. But the council went ahead anyway.reports the times newspaper

[ab29]

17 hours ago, teddyboy23 said:

Lambeth councillors have been given a day off after the west dulwiich action group.confronted them over the ltns.in west dulwich.some of them were left in tears.west dulwich action group want the ltns removed.67% of residents plus some shops were against ltns. But the council went ahead anyway.reports the times newspaper

From what I remember, similar percentage of Dulwich residents opposed the ltn in a few consultations organised by Southwark council

Edited February 14 by ab29

[Rockets]

Is there any LTN that has majority support in its local area (and i am not talking about a single street that has the closure)? It seems like they are installed on the whims of councillors and a few vocal activist groups who are in cahoots with the council and then residents have to live with the dire displacement consequences and are then ignored and belittled by councils and the pro-LTN lobby when they dare say they may not be working.

Edited February 14 by Rockets

[snowy]

I suspect that you are simply trolling now because I mean De Beauvoir, in hackney was what - the 1970s, Newtown, Exeter, lots of LB Merton, the Lanes in Brighton, lots of historic ones in Lambeth, Carnaby St, lots of Edinburgh, bits of Leicester, Station Approach in Herne Hill etc are all just clamouring to go back to cars everywhere aren't they?