LTN Discussion

[Rockets]

Interesting piece on LBC on LTNs in Lambeth...sounds all too familiar

..https://twitter.com/CllrTimBriggs/status/1481970816279629824?t=3H8S0ObEfK-t_mNyGG0RIA&s=19

[heartblock]

Paul Wheeler a Labour Party member is pretty on point here too.

https://www.onlondon.co.uk/paul-wheeler-why-londons-road-wars-are-tearing-labour-apart/

[ab29]

"An example one of a possibly unintended consequences of LTN road closures has been the displacement of traffic onto main roads. London doesn?t have urban motorways ? that battle was won in the 1970s, when the infamous London Box scheme was thrown out by the voters (the only part of it constructed is the unloved Westway and the grim approaches to the Blackwall Tunnel).

Instead, main roads, including the arterials controlled by Transport for London, are also residential roads, which were already dealing with traffic levels well beyond their capacities before Covid and LTNs.

The GLA (step forward the Mayor?s cycling and walking commissioner, Will Norman) have gone to great lengths to deny that main roads can be residential, then moved on to saying that not many people live on them. Yet according to the GLA?s own figures upwards of 10% of Londoners live on these main roads compared to the 4% who live on roads benefitting from an LTN."

I live on LL.

I wonder if anyone from the pro LTN camp is capable of reading with understanding?

This scheme truly is harming people.

[legalalien]

I?ve come across a number of north Londoners over the years who have mistakenly assumed that the South Circular resembles the North Circular - which in general it doesn?t. Cue lots of late arrivals to sports fixtures south of the river.

[heartblock]

The current route was allocated in the late 1930s to existing residential streets. There were several proposals to replace it with a parallel motorway, but nothing has happened and most of the road is still residential streets.

A 2007 report said it was the eighth worst road in Britain and in December 2020, pollution from the South Circular was ruled to be a factor in the death of 9 year old Ella Roberta Kissi-Debrah.

The portion in Dulwich has been completely ignored by Southwark in terms of pollution and traffic monitoring pre and post closing roads - why?

[exdulwicher]

The portion in Dulwich has been completely ignored by Southwark in terms of pollution and traffic monitoring pre and post closing roads - why?

Because the whole South Circular is managed by TfL, it's a Red Route.

They're highly monitored but there's little point in half a dozen separate boroughs looking after a few miles within their area.

It was "bad" even in the 70's and there have been loads of plans and ideas over the years to do all sorts from demolish a load of housing and widen the road to building new flyovers or tunnels but as soon as ideas like that get put forward, there's an immediate petition against it and the cost would be astronomical anyway, no Government could afford that these days. It's not a "planned" road like the North Circular, it's something that's ended up with vastly more traffic than it was ever intended to manage and virtually no way of doing anything about it.

[Rockets]

And it seems to be considered by the council and pro-LTN lobbyists in the mayor's office as one of the absorption routes for the LTN displacement. The way groups of pro-LTN supporters and councillors, most who don't live anywhere near a main road, are happy to suggest roads such as the A205, Lordship Lane, Croxted and EDG etc are designed for the traffic is criminal. It was a subtle, yet very concerning and dangerous, narrative change once they release all the LTNs did was displace traffic.

https://twitter.com/RM_Leeming/status/1437743945992347654?t=ZkHdu-uN2-qCHoinga2oiw&s=19

I think Cllr Leeming and then Urbane Cyclists' posts sums things up here as to the views of many on that side of the fence.....

[Raeburn]

But Rockets, you were happy to post complete disinformation about an LTN on the other side of London?

[ab29]

I agree Rockets, the main roads are treated like dumping grounds for the traffic displaced by LTN and in some cases ULEZ. And it is criminal.

[Southeast Twenty Stu]

.

[Rockets]

Raeburn Wrote:

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

> But Rockets, you were happy to post complete

> disinformation about an LTN on the other side of

> London?

No I didn't. I posted on the basis of something I had seen saying that the Waltham Forest LTN had led to an increase of car ownership within the LTN - you countered to say that was proven to be fake but you didn't provide anything to back up your claim. Feel free to send your proof and let's analyse it. More than happy to stand corrected if you can correct me......

What is clear is that amongst the pro-LTN lobbyists and the pro-LTN councillors there is a feeling that non "side-roads" are the place you send displaced traffic and are the collateral damage for a few residents to live on closed roads.

Do you think that is fair Raeburn - I don't and I think it is reflective that LTNs don't work as they were first intended - to reduce traffic and pollution for everyone - and the pro-LTN lobbyists have had to change their tune significantly to change the narrative?

[heartblock]

So - basically dump your pollution on your poorer neighbour, whether in a different borough or on a road managed by TFL - well at least at last there is a truth being told.

Originally the traffic everywhere was going to 'evaporate', then it was going to be diverted to streets 'built to take cars', now it's clear that traffic doesn't evaporate and the urban streets that traffic is diverted to are major residential areas - and quite clearly cheaper/higher density housing on the South Circ, so will be more affordable than a leafy street of 5 bedroom houses, the excuse now is - 'oh we have no control over those roads'.

The changing narrative is so obvious.

I would like to know what the rise in congestion has been pre and post LTNs there must be a historical way of measuring this from Google-maps. I would also like to know why, when I walk out of my door in the morning I am faced with cars, HGVs and buses idling in a traffic queue from LL all the way down to Village Way - which never existed before the LTNs went in. Even in the 30+ years of living here, if there were road works etc - there was always the ability for traffic to divert.

Why are my lungs, my ears, my health less important than someone living in Melbourne or Calton, why is my road and my neighbours lungs less important.

The traffic has not evaporated - this is a failed 2 year experiment and a failure of the East Dulwich and Dulwich community to care about others.

Selfish.

[Raeburn]

Rockets, I was genuinely curious,

I first asked where you had read; 'Waltham Forest's LTN led to a significant increase in car ownership within it's boundaries.....' and what a 'significant increase' is.

You didn't provide a source, because there isn't one. A basic google tells you otherwise about Waltham Forest LTN.

Trying to help you, I suggested you could have mistaken it with relatively recent chatter about London Fields LTN? There was FOI, which the initial poster mistakenly added a '0' to a figure and passed off as a huge rise in vehicles in the LTN. Maybe it was nothing to do with your first post, but your 'significant increase' resonated with this story.

You're now deliberately conflating two different stories/falsehoods, and somehow putting the onus on others to distract from your own misinformation being called out.

Bit late, but I'd ask you again to correct your post.

[Rockets]

Raeburn - I still hold-out I saw an analysis of increase in car ownership within the Waltham Forest LTN based on DVLA registrations, and as I stated at the time some were suggesting it could be linked to the gentrification of the area post LTN installation. If I find that post I will be sure to share it with you but I didn't make it up - so, no, I won't be correcting my post on the basis of analysis by Rachel Aldred (which is clear what you are basing your assumptions on - but do feel free to correct me if you're not).

It is interesting isn't it that a basic Google search on Waltham Forest LTN car ownership leads you to the inevitable SEO optimised Rachel Aldred and Anna Goodman articles on how wonderful the LTN in Waltham Forest is - which in itself is quite telling but I suspect that's a discussion for another day and I don't want to trigger an accusation of deflection from you! ;-)

[goldilocks]

And yet - when faced with actual traffic counts from the DFT on the section of road that runs past your house and comparing those counts to the new monitoring which shows that traffic has fallen on East Dulwich Grove, you refuse to accept this.

heartblock Wrote:

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

> So - basically dump your pollution on your poorer

> neighbour, whether in a different borough or on a

> road managed by TFL - well at least at last there

> is a truth being told.

> Originally the traffic everywhere was going to

> 'evaporate', then it was going to be diverted to

> streets 'built to take cars', now it's clear that

> traffic doesn't evaporate and the urban streets

> that traffic is diverted to are major residential

> areas - and quite clearly cheaper/higher density

> housing on the South Circ, so will be more

> affordable than a leafy street of 5 bedroom

> houses, the excuse now is - 'oh we have no control

> over those roads'.

> The changing narrative is so obvious.

>

> I would like to know what the rise in congestion

> has been pre and post LTNs there must be a

> historical way of measuring this from Google-maps.

> I would also like to know why, when I walk out of

> my door in the morning I am faced with cars, HGVs

> and buses idling in a traffic queue from LL all

> the way down to Village Way - which never existed

> before the LTNs went in. Even in the 30+ years of

> living here, if there were road works etc - there

> was always the ability for traffic to divert.

> Why are my lungs, my ears, my health less

> important than someone living in Melbourne or

> Calton, why is my road and my neighbours lungs

> less important.

> The traffic has not evaporated - this is a failed

> 2 year experiment and a failure of the East

> Dulwich and Dulwich community to care about

> others.

> Selfish.

[Rockets]

Goldilocks - there are many unanswered questions on that particular section of monitoring. Can you help shed any light perhaps?

I will pose these questions again:

1) Where is the Jan 19 data from (for what purposes was it collected and from which point was it collected as it is not the same location as the Sept 21 monitoring point)?

2) Where is the Sept 21 monitoring point?

3) What methodology was used to arrive at the Sept 21 figure?

4) Why does the EDG Central chart say: the Pre-implementation data for Jan 2019 has been adjusted to September 2019 levels to ensure compatibility and what adjustment took place and why? That suggests to me that the September 2019 figures were modelled.

5) Why was the decision taken to add the EDG Central monitoring point in Sept 21? What, or who, prompted that so late in the process?

6) When was the Sep 21 monitoring captured - was it at the beginning of the month before the private schools went back or at the end of the month during the fuel crisis?

[goldilocks]

These are questions you need to ask the council on their monitoring - no idea how i'd have this information. Though re question 4 I'd put money on the fact that its because that statement exists elsewhere in the report and its been erroneously copied across.

[heartblock]

Not actual traffic counts because it was a new counter - so the pre is made up, but obviously I'm either lying about the new amount of congestion on my road or despite senior academic status I'm an idiot. If it had reduced traffic I would happily support.

Where is the pollution data?

How did they come to a number for pre -LTN when no counter device existed?

Where does the nearly 3000 extra vehicles go once past Melbourne Grove - do they magically disappear?

How can a traffic count register almost zero traffic going north on a road with no turn-offs and 11,000 cars a day?

Is the new traffic counter actually on Melbourne Grove? Is that the counter?

[exdulwicher]

1) Where is the Jan 19 data from (for what purposes was it collected and from which point was it collected as it is not the same location as the Sept 21 monitoring point)?

2) Where is the Sept 21 monitoring point?

3) What methodology was used to arrive at the Sept 21 figure?

4) Why does the EDG Central chart say: the Pre-implementation data for Jan 2019 has been adjusted to September 2019 levels to ensure compatibility and what adjustment took place and why? That suggests to me that the September 2019 figures were modelled.

5) Why was the decision taken to add the EDG Central monitoring point in Sept 21? What, or who, prompted that so late in the process?

6) When was the Sep 21 monitoring captured - was it at the beginning of the month before the private schools went back or at the end of the month during the fuel crisis?

It's all in the Streetspace reports.

Overall review page: https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/improving-our-streets/live-projects/dulwich-review

Section on monitoring:https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/improving-our-streets/live-projects/dulwich-review?chapter=4

There's a LOT in there - methodology, basic explanations of timings and data, locations of counters and so on but it's worth sitting down when you've got some free time to read it carefully and in context.

[Rockets]

goldilocks Wrote:

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

> These are questions you need to ask the council on

> their monitoring - no idea how i'd have this

> information. Though re question 4 I'd put money on

> the fact that its because that statement exists

> elsewhere in the report and its been erroneously

> copied across.

On Point 4 it doesn't exist anywhere else in the report - it is the only slide that has that caveat added to it. What is clearly suggests is that the Sept 19 figures were modelled by adding some secret sauce to the Jan 19 figures (which were taken from a different location on EDG) and it is the secret sauce that delivers an increased between Jan 19 and Sep 19 which then gives the "reduction" in Sep 21.

Jan 19: 12,408 total vehicles

Sep 19: (secret sauce numbers): 15,316 total vehicles

Sep 21: 12,675 total vehicles

I am using the total vehicle numbers because I cannot be bothered to unwrap the different vehicle types.

I did ask Cllr McAsh to provide some detail when he started giving his explanation for the figures but, as yet, no response has been forthcoming.

Also as an aside, very interestingly and something that I had failed to realise, but the council does not seperate cars and LGVs from their analysis but lumps them together. I wonder why they are doing that, especially when TFL goes to great lengths to break them out?

[Raeburn]

Rockets Wrote:

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

> Raeburn - I still hold-out I saw an analysis of

> increase in car ownership within the Waltham

> Forest LTN based on DVLA registrations, and as I

> stated at the time some were suggesting it could

> be linked to the gentrification of the area post

> LTN installation. If I find that post I will be

> sure to share it with you but I didn't make it up

> - so, no, I won't be correcting my post on the

> basis of analysis by Rachel Aldred (which is clear

> what you are basing your assumptions on - but do

> feel free to correct me if you're not).

>

> It is interesting isn't it that a basic Google

> search on Waltham Forest LTN car ownership leads

> you to the inevitable SEO optimised Rachel Aldred

> and Anna Goodman articles on how wonderful the LTN

> in Waltham Forest is - which in itself is quite

> telling but I suspect that's a discussion for

> another day and I don't want to trigger an

> accusation of deflection from you! ;-)

Please post when you find it, genuinely curious where your story comes from. SEO'd or not, I'd have thought this would be big news in such a long-running, model project.

DuckDuckGo doesn't turn up anything, nor including Vincent Stops as you mentioned (a detail that resonated with the London Fields story I suggested).

Best of luck with your quest.

[Rockets]

exdulwicher Wrote:

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

> 1) Where is the Jan 19 data from (for what

> purposes was it collected and from which point was

> it collected as it is not the same location as the

> Sept 21 monitoring point)?

> 2) Where is the Sept 21 monitoring point?

> 3) What methodology was used to arrive at the Sept

> 21 figure?

> 4) Why does the EDG Central chart say: the

> Pre-implementation data for Jan 2019 has been

> adjusted to September 2019 levels to ensure

> compatibility and what adjustment took place and

> why? That suggests to me that the September 2019

> figures were modelled.

> 5) Why was the decision taken to add the EDG

> Central monitoring point in Sept 21? What, or who,

> prompted that so late in the process?

> 6) When was the Sep 21 monitoring captured - was

> it at the beginning of the month before the

> private schools went back or at the end of the

> month during the fuel crisis?

>

> It's all in the Streetspace reports.

> Overall review page:

> https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/i

> mproving-our-streets/live-projects/dulwich-review

> Section on

> monitoring:https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-

> and-roads/improving-our-streets/live-projects/dulw

> ich-review?chapter=4

>

> There's a LOT in there - methodology, basic

> explanations of timings and data, locations of

> counters and so on but it's worth sitting down

> when you've got some free time to read it

> carefully and in context.

Ex- and when you do bury down into that you realise it should probably be classified as a work of fiction!

Look:

When Was Pre-Scheme Data Collected?

? The data used to understand traffic prior to the Streetspace scheme was mostly collected

by the Council for studies prior to 2020 with some additional collection in June 2020. This

data collection all took place outside school holidays.

? Where multiple data sets at a location were collected prior to scheme implementation, the

most recent data collected prior to March 2021 was used to have a pre-scheme dataset

unimpacted by COVID-19 where possible.

When Was Post-Scheme Data Collected?

? Data for after the implementation of the Streetspace schemes was collected in September

2020, and then either continuously or in tranches in 2021.

? On key external roads data has been collected continuously throughout 2021, on other

roads data has been collected for all weeks in March, April, June and September 2021.

? The time periods during which the data in the report were collected are shown overleaf.

Notice how the post scheme data collection fails to mention (as the pre-scheme does) that the numbers were collected outside of school holidays. Surely if you call that out in the pre-scheme collection you need to in the post scheme collection - unless, of course, the data collection happened during the school holidays.

And this made me chuckle as well:

What is cycling demographic data and how

has it been used?

? Cycling demographic data has been collated via manual observation of video footage of

people cycling through the junction of Calton Avenue / Dulwich Village, completed by an

independent party.

So the people responsible for the report didn't actually collate the cycling demographic data themselves it was completed by an "independent party".

I can see how that discussion went down: hey, pro-cycle lobby group you know that video you have of lots of people cycling through Calton Avenue can we use it for Southwark's independent third-party report on how successful the LTNs have been........;-) Anyone want to take a guess on the source of that video?

[goldilocks]

Or its via the vivacity monitor they note and the review of the data collated by those monitors is done by the company supplying them rather than the council? I don't know either, but i'm not suggesting conspiracy.

Rockets - to be clear, you have absolutely zero idea who did the analysis, but you've decided to sling mud 'cos as you know some of it will stick - especially if you keep saying the same things over and over.

For anyone dipping in and out of this thread - there is nothing in the data that suggests that the cycle count numbers on Calton Ave were done by a cycle group. This is just one of the things that Rockets thinks and is presenting as fact.

[exdulwicher]

Sorry Rockets but if you're going to go off into some sort of conspiracy theory rabbit hole there's nothing that anyone can say that will change your mind.

Clearly, the fact that there are no cyclists visible on these cycle lanes is some sort of magic combination of them all wearing black and no lights while also being holed up in some kind of underground bunker in Tooley Street fabricating video evidence and holding councillors hostage. 🙄

Otherwise, if you're gong to make accusations of bias and fiddling figures etc, produce the evidence and take it to the council. Shouldn't be difficult; we've all read the comments on here about how woefully incompetent the council are so finding their wrongdoing should be straightforward, right? Or are they actually some kind of closet geniuses running an industrial-scale cover up operation just for laughs? Schrodinger's Council - simultaneously engaged in a massive data manipulation scheme *and* being too incompetent to run a bath.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

goldilocks Wrote:

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

> Or its via the vivacity monitor they note and the

> review of the data collated by those monitors is

> done by the company supplying them rather than the

> council?

Traffic counts in this country aren't typically done by having people sitting on street corners with clipboards any more. It's cheaper, more reliable and safer to stick up a digital video camera for a while and then do the counts based on the video (either manually with a real person or using AI). It's mostly contractors that do it because they have the cameras and software and staff.

https://tracsistraffic.com/services/traffic-surveys/ is just one example.

You do still have manual counts where things are a bit trickier eg I noticed a traffic survey of buses under the bridges at Peckham Rye Station a couple of weeks ago which was being done manually. Could be the video cameras couldn't get a good view, could be the survey was interested in not just number but specific maneuvers into the stops...?