Lambeth LTN protest Post Reply

[Community Editor]

There's a protest about the Lambeth LTNs and the effect that they've had, particularly on the traffic situation in Streatham after the recent one was introduced there.

It's taking place on the evening of Wednesday 24 January at Lambeth Town Hall in Brixton from 6.30pm.

[Denwand]

Worth attending

[Jo1990]

Are you really the Community Editor? If so, should you not be more impartial? If not, is that not misleading?

Either way, we’ve recently been forced onto bikes. I say that as traffic was bad and so we braved the cold and realised that it was actually much better for many reasons. In a future world with electric cars and more pedestrianised streets, London could be a lot nicer..

Cycle lanes are woeful though so, although I support the LTNs, budget needs to be set aside to make the alternatives workable

[Shaftesburymum]

Dear Community Ed,

Do you really want to be sharing a poster that is full of misinformation? LTNs are divisive for sure, and it's good that all people affected have their voices heard, but debate and dissent should be based on good research and factual information.

Pollution on boundary roads is not caused or exacerbated by LTNs; to state the obvious, it is caused by vehicles.
https://centreforlondon.org/publication ... bourhoods/

There is ample evidence that the more public space given over to cars, the more people will drive, the higher the pollution. There is little evidence that LTNs push traffic onto boundary roads.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... ads-london

If your concern is the immediate vicinity of primary schools, the mayor has a programme to make improvements, and you should be supportive of School Streets. The other obvious solution is for parents not to drive their children to school and instead to walk, cycle or bus. Thankfully, LTNs, along with School Streets, help to make those options safer and more viable.

https://www.london.gov.uk/programmes-an ... 5956=45954

The data suggests that UK LTNs are associated with decreased crime. There is ample data globally showing that less traffic results in less crime.
https://findingspress.org/article/19414 ... Table%202).

There's some good information in this article about what is causing the increase in traffic in London. 
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -than-ever

We can all help by using active travel or public transport over Uber and personal vehicles and avoiding multitudes of home deliveries (Amazon Prime, for example).

I can only hope that the Lambeth councillors attempt to address real concerns based on good data, and continue to implement traffic controls in a considered way so that we can have a safer city in the future.

 

[Unhappyresident]

Thank you for highlighting this and the plight of many struggling to get on with their day negotiating , no through roads and busier main roads.
Lambeth will soon be one giant LTN if we don’t try to be heard.

[LTN No Thank you]

Thank you so much for posting the details of the March at Lambeth Town Hall on January 24th.

I shall definitely be attending and encourage those whose lives have been deeply impacted by this scheme to also go along.

Life for many isn’t always as simple as hopping onto an electric bike as an alternative. Whilst forcing all the traffic onto Streatham High Road which is a major road down to the South Coast is madness. Streatham High Road does not have the infrastructure to handle more traffic. If we are being encouraged to take public transport, then the scheme is flawed as buses are now taking three times as long as they sit in gridlock. Whilst many of those that live within the LTN loathe it for many reasons.

This protest is not anti-cyclist and of course we are concerned about the environment but the Streatham Wells LTN is detrimental to the area in so many ways.

[chorister]

“…. of course we are all concerned about the environment …..” well yes, as long all the costs and lifestyle impacts fall on other people.

[readysteadycook]

All roads should be open and the number of school streets springing up does nothing for safety.

The more roads that get closed, the less road space for the cars and the more traffic jams. As we see in the terribly run Lambeth council, the pollution on the boundary roads is not good now. 

I have had 2 fines, fines I didn't even know I would get until the post arrived. The6 are badly signposted generally. 

LTN’s are a big money making scam used primarily by badly run indebted (usually Labour) councils. So watch out Wandworth Residents as one female Balham Labour Councillor is very anti car.

Enough is enough and protests like this one, need to grow and become more assertive. Claire Holland at Lambeth needs to listen.

[readysteadycook]

“…. of course we are all concerned about the environment …..” well yes, as long all the costs and lifestyle impacts fall on other people.

Whilst it’s good we don’t have lots of diesel and petrol fumes pumped out into our city, when will people realise these policies are all about control and money making. 

Nothing to do with the climate scam that so many people are now waking up to.

[TOXIX GRIDLOCK]

I totally agree with readysteadycook. LTN’s are not environmental at all. The only reason the Streatham Wells LTN has been implemented is because it generates a huge income for Lambeth Council which badly run and has no money.

This is proven as the air quality on the bordering roads Streatham High Road, Leigham Court Road and Streatham Common Northside is appalling. Of which the playgrounds of four schools are situated. Rezina Chowdhury who forced this absurd scheme had the audacity on the itv news to claim that air quality had improved and that any traffic congestion was due to roadworks and the new system bedding in. The LTN is poorly signposted deliberately so more people get fined straying into the restricted zone.

Yes I care about the environment but LTN’s are not the answer - they are a cash cow for the Borough.

[chorister]

readysteadycook wrote "Nothing to do with the climate scam".  Which "climate scam" would that be?

Do you really not understand how simple it is?  Radiation arrives from the sun at short visible / ultraviolet wavelengths.  About 30% is reflected / radiated back to space at long infrared wavelengths.  Greenhouse gases are less transparent to long than short wavelengths (the clue is in the name 'greenhouse gas') so as GHG concentrations rise less energy escapes back into space.  Instead it is retained in the atmosphere.  More energy = more heat, so the atmosphere warms, changing the climate.  It really is that simple - the effect was first documented in 1859.  And by the way, at higher temperatures cereals yield about 15% less protein (that can be proved in the laboratory) and 70% of the world's population relies on cereals as it primary source of protein.

There is a talk about it at the Clapham Society sometime in mid February - may be you should try to go.